MSFL vs. NEMG

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) and NEMG (Leverage Shares 2x Long NEM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MSFL charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for NEMG.

Performance

MSFL vs. NEMG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSFL achieves a -51.34% return, which is significantly lower than NEMG's -24.50% return.

MSFL

• 1D: -7.03%
• 1M: -29.70%
• YTD: -51.34%
• 6M: -52.32%
• 1Y: -55.20%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NEMG

• 1D: 3.21%
• 1M: -29.04%
• YTD: -24.50%
• 6M: -31.89%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MSFL vs. NEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-51.34%	-10.90%
NEMG Leverage Shares 2x Long NEM Daily ETF	-24.50%	22.87%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFL and NEMG is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2025	0.15

Return for Risk

MSFL vs. NEMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 1
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 1
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 1

NEMG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. NEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	MSFL	NEMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.06	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.61	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.80	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.89	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.66	—	—

Drawdowns

MSFL vs. NEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFL drawdown since its inception was -62.08%, which is greater than NEMG's maximum drawdown of -57.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFL and NEMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSFL	NEMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.08%	-57.56%	-4.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-62.08%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-62.08%	-55.82%	-6.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.38%	-23.65%	+1.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.27%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MSFL	NEMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	23.64%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	47.15%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	52.46%	102.58%	-50.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	50.17%	102.58%	-52.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.17%	102.58%	-52.41%

MSFL vs. NEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFL has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than NEMG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFL vs. NEMG - Dividend Comparison

Neither MSFL nor NEMG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSFL and NEMG in my portfolio?

MSFL and NEMG have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MSFL or NEMG?

On fees, NEMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSFL or NEMG?

NEMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for MSFL.

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

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

What is the main difference between MSFL and NEMG?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for MSFL and 0.75% for NEMG.