PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MULL vs. FBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MULL vs. FBL - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MULL achieves a 936.86% return, which is significantly higher than FBL's -19.72% return.


MULL

1D
2.92%
1M
216.81%
YTD
936.86%
6M
1,369.93%
1Y
6,074.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FBL

1D
8.48%
1M
2.55%
YTD
-19.72%
6M
-15.34%
1Y
-29.78%
3Y*
33.25%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MULL vs. FBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MULL
GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF
936.86%558.51%-40.10%
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
-19.72%0.50%-1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between MULL and FBL is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 13, 2024

0.32

MULL vs. FBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MULL
FBL

Technology

66.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

66.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

MULL
66.7%
FBL

-

Basic Materials

MULL

-

FBL

-

Communication Services

MULL

-

FBL
66.7%

Consumer Cyclical

MULL

-

FBL

-

Consumer Defensive

MULL

-

FBL

-

Energy

MULL

-

FBL

-

Financial Services

MULL

-

FBL

-

Healthcare

MULL

-

FBL

-

Industrials

MULL

-

FBL

-

Real Estate

MULL

-

FBL

-

Utilities

MULL

-

FBL

-

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

MULL vs. FBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MULL
MULL Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank

FBL
FBL Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 44
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.

MULL vs. FBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) and GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL). 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.


MULLFBLDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

46.71

-0.42

+47.13

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

7.02

-0.22

+7.23

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.89

0.97

+0.92

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

116.34

-0.49

+116.83

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

390.40

-0.91

+391.31

MULL vs. FBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MULL Sharpe Ratio is 46.71, which is higher than the FBL Sharpe Ratio of -0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MULL and FBL, 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


MULLFBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

46.71

-0.42

+47.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

7.45

1.12

+6.33

Drawdowns

MULL vs. FBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MULL drawdown since its inception was -72.29%, which is greater than FBL's maximum drawdown of -61.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MULL and FBL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MULLFBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.29%

-61.15%

-11.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-53.09%

-61.03%

+7.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-61.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-47.97%

+47.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.62%

-16.41%

-4.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

15.79%

32.76%

-16.97%

Volatility

MULL vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a higher volatility of 55.41% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) at 17.63%. This indicates that MULL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MULLFBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

55.41%

17.63%

+37.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

105.59%

53.15%

+52.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

132.38%

70.42%

+61.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

136.22%

71.06%

+65.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

136.22%

71.06%

+65.16%

MULL vs. FBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MULL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBL's 1.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

MULL vs. FBL - Dividend Comparison

MULL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than FBL's 2.58% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
2.58%2.07%0.00%51.58%
MULL
GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF
0.04%0.39%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MULL and FBL have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MULL has higher volatility (55.41%) compared to FBL (17.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MULL dropped -72.29% vs FBL's -61.15%.

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 6074.28% vs -29.78% for FBL. On fees, FBL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, FBL has been the lower-risk option at 17.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 6074.28% return vs -29.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 0.04% for MULL.

Their fees differ too: 1.50% for MULL and 1.15% for FBL.

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (46.71 vs -0.42), 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 MULL and FBL

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