NOWL vs. BAR
NOWL (GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF) and BAR (GraniteShares Gold Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - NOWL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while BAR is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). NOWL is actively managed, while BAR is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. NOWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for BAR.
Performance
NOWL vs. BAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NOWL achieves a -71.09% return, which is significantly lower than BAR's -4.82% return.
NOWL
- 1D
- 6.15%
- 1M
- -17.53%
- YTD
- -71.09%
- 6M
- -71.60%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAR
- 1D
- -1.94%
- 1M
- -8.92%
- YTD
- -4.82%
- 6M
- -8.73%
- 1Y
- 21.40%
- 3Y*
- 28.63%
- 5Y*
- 18.08%
- 10Y*
- —
NOWL vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF | -71.09% | -43.64% |
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | -4.82% | 28.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between NOWL and BAR is -0.00, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025 | -0.00 |
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
NOWL vs. BAR — Risk / Return Rank
NOWL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BAR
NOWL vs. BAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR). 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.
| NOWL | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.17 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.88 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 2.37 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NOWL vs. BAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NOWL drawdown since its inception was -86.57%, which is greater than BAR's maximum drawdown of -24.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOWL and BAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NOWL | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.57% | -24.38% | -62.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -24.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -24.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -84.59% | -23.93% | -60.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -49.22% | -6.53% | -42.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 9.07% | — |
Volatility
NOWL vs. BAR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NOWL | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.11% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 24.24% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 103.16% | 27.39% | +75.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 103.16% | 18.14% | +85.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 103.16% | 16.54% | +86.62% |
NOWL vs. BAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
NOWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BAR's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
NOWL vs. BAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither NOWL nor BAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOWL and BAR have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for NOWL.
NOWL and BAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
NOWL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BAR is Gold. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for NOWL and 0.17% for BAR.
Find the right allocation for NOWL and BAR
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