MULL vs. MSFL

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) and MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MULL returned 2677.24% vs -26.66% for MSFL. Their 0.18 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. MULL charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for MSFL.

Performance

MULL vs. MSFL - 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 MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MULL achieves a 365.77% return, which is significantly higher than MSFL's -10.77% return.

MULL

• 1D: 1.40%
• 1M: -35.21%
• 6M: 109.23%
• YTD: 365.77%
• 1Y: 2,677.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 446.64%

MSFL

• 1D: 9.72%
• 1M: 51.15%
• 6M: 19.21%
• YTD: -10.77%
• 1Y: -26.66%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -1.78%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	$42.00M	$33.79M	$35.34M
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	$193.24M	$208.11M	$267.73M

MULL vs. MSFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	365.77%	558.51%	-39.23%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-10.77%	16.99%	0.30%

Correlation

The correlation between MULL and MSFL is 0.05, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2024	0.18

The correlation between MULL and MSFL shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (1 year) to 0.18 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MULL vs. MSFL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

MULL vs. MSFL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MULL

MULL Risk / Return Rank: 98
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 96
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 99

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 6
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 7
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 6

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MULL vs. MSFL - 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 MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). 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.

	MULL	MSFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	16.75	-0.42	+17.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.89	-0.27	+5.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	0.97	+0.65
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	39.82	-0.43	+40.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	129.25	-0.71	+129.96

MULL vs. MSFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MULL Sharpe Ratio is 16.75, which is higher than the MSFL Sharpe Ratio of -0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MULL and MSFL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MULL vs. MSFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MULL drawdown since its inception was -72.29%, which is greater than MSFL's maximum drawdown of -62.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MULL and MSFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	MULL	MSFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.29%	-62.08%	-10.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-68.16%	-62.08%	-6.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-61.07%	-30.47%	-30.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.95%	-23.69%	+1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.96%	37.36%	-16.40%

Volatility

MULL vs. MSFL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a higher volatility of 60.92% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) at 30.67%. This indicates that MULL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MSFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MULL	MSFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	60.92%	30.67%	+30.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	134.81%	52.19%	+82.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	162.42%	63.60%	+98.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	149.56%	54.66%	+94.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	149.56%	54.66%	+94.90%

MULL vs. MSFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

MULL vs. MSFL - Dividend Comparison

MULL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, while MSFL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	0.08%	0.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MULL and MSFL in my portfolio?

MULL and MSFL have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MULL or MSFL?

MULL has higher volatility (60.92%) compared to MSFL (30.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MULL dropped -72.29% vs MSFL's -62.08%.

Which ETF is better, MULL or MSFL?

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 2677.24% vs -26.66% for MSFL. On fees, MSFL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, MSFL has been the lower-risk option at 30.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MULL or MSFL?

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 2677.24% return vs -26.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MULL or MSFL?

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

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

MULL has the higher dividend yield at 0.08%, compared with 0.00% for MSFL.

What is the main difference between MULL and MSFL?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.75 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.