MSFL vs. AMDL

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) and AMDL (GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MSFL returned -25.09% vs 1075.21% for AMDL. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 1.15% expense ratio.

Performance

MSFL vs. AMDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSFL achieves a -27.39% return, which is significantly lower than AMDL's 360.26% return.

MSFL

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: 6.90%
• YTD: -27.39%
• 6M: -26.98%
• 1Y: -25.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMDL

• 1D: -7.05%
• 1M: 102.52%
• YTD: 360.26%
• 6M: 344.53%
• 1Y: 1,075.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MSFL vs. AMDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-27.39%	16.99%	-9.07%
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	360.26%	103.00%	-69.97%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFL and AMDL is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2024	0.35

The correlation between MSFL and AMDL shifts across timeframes, from 0.21 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MSFL vs. AMDL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MSFL	AMDL
Technology	66.6%	66.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MSFL vs. AMDL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 5
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 5

AMDL

AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 96
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 92
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 96

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MSFL vs. AMDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). 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.

	MSFL	AMDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.50	8.38	-8.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.42	4.65	-5.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	1.61	-0.66
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.42	19.36	-19.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.82	38.01	-38.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MSFL vs. AMDL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSFL Sharpe Ratio is -0.50, which is lower than the AMDL Sharpe Ratio of 8.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSFL and AMDL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MSFL	AMDL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.50	8.38	-8.88
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.22	0.51	-0.74

Drawdowns

MSFL vs. AMDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFL drawdown since its inception was -59.39%, smaller than the maximum AMDL drawdown of -88.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFL and AMDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSFL	AMDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.39%	-88.63%	+29.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-59.39%	-56.13%	-3.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-43.42%	-7.05%	-36.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.62%	-48.51%	+26.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.73%	28.54%	+2.19%

Volatility

MSFL vs. AMDL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) is 19.76%, while GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL) has a volatility of 47.19%. This indicates that MSFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMDL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSFL	AMDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.76%	47.19%	-27.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.21%	94.32%	-49.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.18%	129.64%	-79.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.55%	116.59%	-67.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.55%	116.59%	-67.04%

MSFL vs. AMDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both MSFL and AMDL have an expense ratio of 1.15%.

Dividends

MSFL vs. AMDL - Dividend Comparison

Neither MSFL nor AMDL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSFL and AMDL in my portfolio?

MSFL and AMDL have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSFL or AMDL?

AMDL has higher volatility (47.19%) compared to MSFL (19.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSFL dropped -59.39% vs AMDL's -88.63%.

Which ETF is better, MSFL or AMDL?

On 1-year performance, AMDL leads with 1075.21% vs -25.09% for MSFL. Both ETFs have the same 1.15% expense ratio. On volatility, MSFL has been the lower-risk option at 19.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSFL or AMDL?

Over the 1-year period, AMDL has performed better with a 1075.21% return vs -25.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSFL or AMDL?

MSFL and AMDL have the same expense ratio: 1.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MSFL or AMDL?

MSFL and AMDL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMDL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.38 vs -0.50), 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.