MSFL vs. ERX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) and ERX (Direxion Daily Energy Bull 2X Shares) are both Leveraged Equities funds. MSFL is actively managed, while ERX is passively managed. Over the past year, MSFL returned -25.09% vs 98.14% for ERX. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. MSFL charges 1.15%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for ERX.

Performance

MSFL vs. ERX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) and Direxion Daily Energy Bull 2X Shares (ERX). 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 ERX's 66.84% return.

MSFL

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

ERX

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -3.57%
• YTD: 66.84%
• 6M: 58.30%
• 1Y: 98.14%
• 3Y*: 24.19%
• 5Y*: 28.74%
• 10Y*: -9.37%

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

MSFL vs. ERX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-27.39%	16.99%	-9.07%
ERX Direxion Daily Energy Bull 2X Shares	66.84%	2.79%	-14.28%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFL and ERX is -0.13, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2024	-0.02

The correlation between MSFL and ERX shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to -0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MSFL vs. ERX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MSFL	ERX
Technology	66.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MSFL vs. ERX — 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

ERX

ERX Risk / Return Rank: 68
ERX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
ERX Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
ERX Omega Ratio Rank: 58
ERX Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
ERX Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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. ERX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) and Direxion Daily Energy Bull 2X Shares (ERX). 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	ERX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.50	2.42	-2.92
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.42	2.79	-3.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	1.35	-0.40
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.42	4.23	-4.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.82	11.45	-12.26
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. ERX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSFL Sharpe Ratio is -0.50, which is lower than the ERX Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSFL and ERX, 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	ERX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.50	2.42	-2.92
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.56	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	-0.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.22	-0.09	-0.14

Drawdowns

MSFL vs. ERX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFL drawdown since its inception was -59.39%, smaller than the maximum ERX drawdown of -99.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFL and ERX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSFL	ERX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.39%	-99.54%	+40.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-59.39%	-23.34%	-36.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-42.34%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-46.90%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-98.59%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-43.42%	-91.58%	+48.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.62%	-67.03%	+45.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.73%	8.60%	+22.13%

Volatility

MSFL vs. ERX - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) has a higher volatility of 19.76% compared to Direxion Daily Energy Bull 2X Shares (ERX) at 16.49%. This indicates that MSFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ERX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSFL	ERX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.76%	16.49%	+3.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.21%	33.31%	+11.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.18%	41.08%	+9.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.55%	51.98%	-2.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.55%	69.16%	-19.61%

MSFL vs. ERX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than ERX's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFL vs. ERX - Dividend Comparison

MSFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ERX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ERX Direxion Daily Energy Bull 2X Shares	1.61%	2.54%	2.94%	3.17%	2.23%	2.16%	2.35%	1.56%	3.10%	0.85%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSFL and ERX in my portfolio?

MSFL and ERX have a correlation of -0.13, 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 ERX?

MSFL has higher volatility (19.76%) compared to ERX (16.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSFL dropped -59.39% vs ERX's -99.54%.

Which ETF is better, MSFL or ERX?

On 1-year performance, ERX leads with 98.14% vs -25.09% for MSFL. On fees, ERX is cheaper at 1.09% per year. On volatility, ERX has been the lower-risk option at 16.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSFL or ERX?

Over the 1-year period, ERX has performed better with a 98.14% 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 ERX?

ERX is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for MSFL.

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

ERX has the higher dividend yield at 1.61%, compared with 0.00% for MSFL.

What is the main difference between MSFL and ERX?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for MSFL and 1.09% for ERX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ERX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 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.