MRAL vs. LULG
MRAL (GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF) and LULG (Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. MRAL is passively managed, while LULG is actively managed. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MRAL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LULG.
Performance
MRAL vs. LULG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MRAL achieves a 65.74% return, which is significantly higher than LULG's -68.07% return.
MRAL
- 1D
- -4.00%
- 1M
- 33.63%
- YTD
- 65.74%
- 6M
- -16.49%
- 1Y
- -60.79%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LULG
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- -6.81%
- YTD
- -68.07%
- 6M
- -59.49%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MRAL vs. LULG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MRAL GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF | 65.74% | -75.36% |
LULG Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF | -68.07% | 47.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between MRAL and LULG is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2025 | 0.09 |
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
MRAL vs. LULG — Risk / Return Rank
MRAL
LULG
MRAL vs. LULG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF (MRAL) and Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF (LULG). 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.
| MRAL | LULG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.65 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.92 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MRAL | LULG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.40 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.40 | -0.86 | +0.46 |
Drawdowns
MRAL vs. LULG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MRAL drawdown since its inception was -93.46%, which is greater than LULG's maximum drawdown of -73.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MRAL and LULG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MRAL | LULG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -93.46% | -73.18% | -20.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -93.46% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.17% | -70.43% | -7.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.03% | -33.45% | -22.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 66.02% | — | — |
Volatility
MRAL vs. LULG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MRAL | LULG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 33.29% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 115.01% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 153.49% | 85.71% | +67.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 164.22% | 85.71% | +78.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 164.22% | 85.71% | +78.51% |
MRAL vs. LULG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MRAL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LULG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
MRAL vs. LULG - Dividend Comparison
Neither MRAL nor LULG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MRAL and LULG have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LULG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LULG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MRAL.
MRAL and LULG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for MRAL and 0.75% for LULG.
Find the right allocation for MRAL and LULG
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