NFLU vs. INTW
NFLU (T-REX 2X Long Netflix Daily Target ETF) and INTW (GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NFLU returned -73.54% vs 1964.55% for INTW. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NFLU charges 1.05%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for INTW.
Performance
NFLU vs. INTW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NFLU achieves a -46.72% return, which is significantly lower than INTW's 750.22% return.
NFLU
- 1D
- -0.32%
- 1M
- -33.62%
- YTD
- -46.72%
- 6M
- -46.68%
- 1Y
- -73.54%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INTW
- 1D
- -12.49%
- 1M
- 12.21%
- YTD
- 750.22%
- 6M
- 775.58%
- 1Y
- 1,964.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NFLU vs. INTW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NFLU T-REX 2X Long Netflix Daily Target ETF | -46.72% | -32.25% |
INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF | 750.22% | 60.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between NFLU and INTW is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025 | 0.03 |
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
NFLU vs. INTW — Risk / Return Rank
NFLU
INTW
NFLU vs. INTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T-REX 2X Long Netflix Daily Target ETF (NFLU) 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.
| NFLU | INTW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -14.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -7.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.74 | 1.65 | -0.91 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.96 | 40.32 | -41.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.50 | 91.49 | -92.99 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NFLU vs. INTW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NFLU drawdown since its inception was -76.74%, which is greater than INTW's maximum drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NFLU and INTW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NFLU | INTW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -76.74% | -60.58% | -16.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -76.74% | -49.34% | -27.40% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -76.74% | -12.49% | -64.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.18% | -29.66% | +0.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 49.08% | 21.70% | +27.38% |
Volatility
NFLU vs. INTW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for T-REX 2X Long Netflix Daily Target ETF (NFLU) is 16.02%, while GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF (INTW) has a volatility of 55.81%. This indicates that NFLU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NFLU | INTW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.02% | 55.81% | -39.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 50.90% | 119.10% | -68.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 67.87% | 150.14% | -82.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 69.06% | 148.88% | -79.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 69.06% | 148.88% | -79.82% |
NFLU vs. INTW - Expense Ratio Comparison
NFLU has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is lower than INTW's 1.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
NFLU vs. INTW - Dividend Comparison
Neither NFLU nor INTW has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
NFLU and INTW have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
INTW has higher volatility (55.81%) compared to NFLU (16.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NFLU dropped -76.74% vs INTW's -60.58%.
On 1-year performance, INTW leads with 1964.55% vs -73.54% for NFLU. On fees, NFLU is cheaper at 1.05% per year. On volatility, NFLU has been the lower-risk option at 16.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, INTW has performed better with a 1964.55% return vs -73.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NFLU is cheaper with a 1.05% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for INTW.
NFLU and INTW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: REX Shares and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for NFLU and 1.50% for INTW.
INTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (13.25 vs -1.09), 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.
Find the right allocation for NFLU and INTW
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