METW vs. FBL
METW (Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF) and FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - METW is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Ball Metaverse Index, while FBL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. METW is passively managed, while FBL is actively managed. Over the past year, METW returned -13.81% vs -33.14% for FBL. With a 1.00 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. METW charges 0.59%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for FBL.
Performance
METW vs. FBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, METW achieves a -1.13% return, which is significantly higher than FBL's -10.83% return.
METW
- 1D
- 7.05%
- 1M
- 20.64%
- 6M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- -1.13%
- 1Y
- -13.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBL
- 1D
- 11.89%
- 1M
- 33.10%
- 6M
- -8.64%
- YTD
- -10.83%
- 1Y
- -33.14%
- 3Y*
- 32.40%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
METW vs. FBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
METW Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF | -1.13% | -9.14% |
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF | -10.83% | -19.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between METW and FBL is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.00 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025 | 1.00 |
The correlation between METW and FBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 1.00 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.
METW vs. FBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
METW
FBL
Communication Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Communication Services
METW
FBL
Basic Materials
METW
-
FBL
-
Consumer Cyclical
METW
-
FBL
-
Consumer Defensive
METW
-
FBL
-
Energy
METW
-
FBL
-
Financial Services
METW
-
FBL
-
Healthcare
METW
-
FBL
-
Industrials
METW
-
FBL
-
Real Estate
METW
-
FBL
-
Technology
METW
-
FBL
-
Utilities
METW
-
FBL
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
METW vs. FBL — Risk / Return Rank
METW
FBL
METW vs. FBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF (METW) and GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| METW | FBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 0.97 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.34 | -0.54 | +0.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.62 | -0.90 | +0.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
METW vs. FBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum METW drawdown since its inception was -40.52%, smaller than the maximum FBL drawdown of -61.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METW and FBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| METW | FBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.52% | -61.15% | +20.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -40.52% | -61.03% | +20.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -61.15% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -21.55% | -42.21% | +20.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -18.72% | -17.46% | -1.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 22.25% | 36.96% | -14.71% |
Volatility
METW vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF (METW) is 18.99%, while GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a volatility of 32.04%. This indicates that METW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| METW | FBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.99% | 32.04% | -13.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 36.97% | 61.79% | -24.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 45.79% | 76.95% | -31.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.06% | 72.37% | -27.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 45.06% | 72.37% | -27.31% |
METW vs. FBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
METW has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than FBL's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
METW vs. FBL - Dividend Comparison
METW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 53.02%, more than FBL's 2.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF | 2.33% | 2.07% | 0.00% | 51.58% |
METW Roundhill Meta Weeklypay ETF | 53.02% | 30.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 1.00, METW and FBL move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
FBL has higher volatility (32.04%) compared to METW (18.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, METW dropped -40.52% vs FBL's -61.15%.
On 1-year performance, METW leads with -13.81% vs -33.14% for FBL. On fees, METW is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, METW has been the lower-risk option at 18.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, METW has performed better with a -13.81% return vs -33.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
METW is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for FBL.
METW has the higher dividend yield at 53.02%, compared with 2.33% for FBL.
METW is categorized as Technology Equities, while FBL is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for METW and 1.09% for FBL.
METW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.30 vs -0.43), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for METW and FBL
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer