MUU vs. INTW

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

MUU (Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. MUU is passively managed, while INTW is actively managed. Over the past year, MUU returned 2599.25% vs 833.60% for INTW. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MUU charges 1.01%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for INTW.

Performance

MUU vs. INTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU) and GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MUU achieves a 449.17% return, which is significantly higher than INTW's 332.72% return.

MUU

• 1D: -12.02%
• 1M: -37.86%
• 6M: 305.92%
• YTD: 449.17%
• 1Y: 2,599.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

INTW

• 1D: -11.89%
• 1M: -36.23%
• 6M: 160.20%
• YTD: 332.72%
• 1Y: 833.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MUU vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares	449.17%	526.22%
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	332.72%	60.89%

Correlation

The correlation between MUU and INTW is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.50

The correlation between MUU and INTW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MUU vs. INTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MUU

MUU Risk / Return Rank: 98
MUU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MUU Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
MUU Omega Ratio Rank: 95
MUU Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MUU Martin Ratio Rank: 99

INTW

INTW Risk / Return Rank: 96
INTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
INTW Omega Ratio Rank: 91
INTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
INTW Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

MUU vs. INTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU) and GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW). 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.

	MUU	INTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	17.30	5.47	+11.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.00	3.89	+1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.63	1.48	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	47.69	15.18	+32.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	152.81	36.20	+116.61

MUU vs. INTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MUU Sharpe Ratio is 17.30, which is higher than the INTW Sharpe Ratio of 5.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MUU and INTW, 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

MUU vs. INTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MUU drawdown since its inception was -75.07%, which is greater than INTW's maximum drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUU and INTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MUU	INTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.07%	-60.58%	-14.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-55.25%	-55.46%	+0.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-55.25%	-55.46%	+0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.62%	-29.73%	+6.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.31%	23.21%	-5.90%

Volatility

MUU vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares (MUU) has a higher volatility of 62.52% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) at 52.06%. This indicates that MUU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MUU	INTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	62.52%	52.06%	+10.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	125.23%	123.38%	+1.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	152.52%	154.09%	-1.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	142.32%	149.56%	-7.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	142.32%	149.56%	-7.24%

MUU vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MUU has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is lower than INTW's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

MUU vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison

MUU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, while INTW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MUU Direxion Daily MU Bull 2X Shares	1.24%	4.27%	0.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MUU and INTW in my portfolio?

MUU and INTW have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MUU or INTW?

MUU has higher volatility (62.52%) compared to INTW (52.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUU dropped -75.07% vs INTW's -60.58%.

Which ETF is better, MUU or INTW?

On 1-year performance, MUU leads with 2599.25% vs 833.60% for INTW. On fees, MUU is cheaper at 1.01% per year. On volatility, INTW has been the lower-risk option at 52.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MUU or INTW?

Over the 1-year period, MUU has performed better with a 2599.25% return vs 833.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MUU or INTW?

MUU is cheaper with a 1.01% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MUU or INTW?

MUU has the higher dividend yield at 1.24%, compared with 0.00% for INTW.

What is the main difference between MUU and INTW?

They also come from different issuers: Direxion and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for MUU and 1.50% for INTW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MUU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.30 vs 5.47), 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.