PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MSFL vs. HDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MSFL vs. HDV

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) and HDV (iShares Core High Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MSFL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while HDV is a Dividend fund tracking the Morningstar Dividend Yield Focus Index. MSFL is actively managed, while HDV is passively managed. Over the past year, MSFL returned -30.20% vs 22.66% for HDV. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. MSFL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for HDV.

Performance

MSFL vs. HDV - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSFL achieves a -31.37% return, which is significantly lower than HDV's 13.73% return.

MSFL

1D
-5.47%
1M
-0.00%
YTD
-31.37%
6M
-31.63%
1Y
-30.20%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

HDV

1D
0.22%
1M
1.36%
YTD
13.73%
6M
14.28%
1Y
22.66%
3Y*
15.37%
5Y*
10.52%
10Y*
9.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MSFL vs. HDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
MSFL
GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF		-31.37%16.99%-9.07%
HDV
iShares Core High Dividend ETF		13.73%11.90%7.79%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFL and HDV is -0.17, 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

-0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2024

-0.05

The correlation between MSFL and HDV shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.05 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MSFL vs. HDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
MSFL
HDV

Technology

66.6%
8.2%

Basic Materials

-

1.2%

Communication Services

-

0.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

6.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

24.1%

Energy

-

22.3%

Financial Services

-

11.1%

Healthcare

-

16.5%

Industrials

-

1.4%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

9.2%

Technology

MSFL
66.6%
HDV
8.2%

Basic Materials

MSFL

-

HDV
1.2%

Communication Services

MSFL

-

HDV
0.1%

Consumer Cyclical

MSFL

-

HDV
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

MSFL

-

HDV
24.1%

Energy

MSFL

-

HDV
22.3%

Financial Services

MSFL

-

HDV
11.1%

Healthcare

MSFL

-

HDV
16.5%

Industrials

MSFL

-

HDV
1.4%

Real Estate

MSFL

-

HDV

-

Utilities

MSFL

-

HDV
9.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF

iShares Core High Dividend ETF

Often compared with MSFL:
MSFL vs. MSFUMSFL vs. MSFXMSFL vs. MSFTMSFL vs. FBLMSFL vs. GGLLMSFL vs. TQQQMSFL vs. TSMX
Often compared with HDV:
HDV vs. SCHDHDV vs. VYMHDV vs. SPYDHDV vs. DGROHDV vs. DVYHDV vs. VIGHDV vs. SPY

Return for Risk

MSFL vs. HDV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MSFL
MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
Calmar Ratio Rank
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank
HDV
HDV Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
HDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
HDV Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
HDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
HDV Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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. HDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) and iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV). 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.

MSFLHDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
-0.60
2.35

-2.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
-0.60
3.45

-4.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.92

1.40

-0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.51

4.40

-4.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.98

12.22

-13.20

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. HDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSFL Sharpe Ratio is -0.60, which is lower than the HDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSFL and HDV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

MSFLHDVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.60

2.35

-2.95

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

—

0.82

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.59

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.27

0.73

-0.99

Drawdowns

MSFL vs. HDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFL drawdown since its inception was -59.39%, which is greater than HDV's maximum drawdown of -37.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFL and HDV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MSFLHDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.39%

-37.04%

-22.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-59.39%

-5.18%

-54.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-10.49%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-15.42%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-37.04%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-46.52%

-1.65%

-44.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-21.67%

-3.09%

-18.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

30.87%

1.86%

+29.01%

Volatility

MSFL vs. HDV - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) has a higher volatility of 20.61% compared to iShares Core High Dividend ETF (HDV) at 3.16%. This indicates that MSFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MSFLHDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

20.61%

3.16%

+17.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

45.27%

7.51%

+37.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

50.47%

9.71%

+40.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

49.65%

12.82%

+36.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

49.65%

15.73%

+33.92%

MSFL vs. HDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than HDV's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFL vs. HDV - Dividend Comparison

MSFL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HDV
iShares Core High Dividend ETF		2.88%3.22%3.67%3.82%3.56%3.47%4.07%3.27%3.67%3.27%3.28%3.92%
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%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

MSFL and HDV have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MSFL has higher volatility (20.61%) compared to HDV (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSFL dropped -59.39% vs HDV's -37.04%.

On 1-year performance, HDV leads with 22.66% vs -30.20% for MSFL. On fees, HDV is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, HDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, HDV has performed better with a 22.66% return vs -30.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

HDV is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for MSFL.

HDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.88%, compared with 0.00% for MSFL.

MSFL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while HDV is Dividend. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for MSFL and 0.08% for HDV.

HDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs -0.60), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MSFL and HDV

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