NOWL vs. BAR

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

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. Over the past year, NOWL returned -76.52% vs 20.39% for BAR. Their -0.02 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. NOWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for BAR.

Performance

NOWL vs. BAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOWL achieves a -63.41% return, which is significantly lower than BAR's -6.21% return.

NOWL

• 1D: 2.14%
• 1M: 5.43%
• 6M: -34.34%
• YTD: -63.41%
• 1Y: -76.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -77.99%

BAR

• 1D: -1.51%
• 1M: -1.73%
• 6M: -16.49%
• YTD: -6.21%
• 1Y: 20.39%
• 3Y*: 27.47%
• 5Y*: 17.20%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.26%

*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)
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	$8.48M	$7.76M	$9.82M
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF	$112.35M	$97.45M	$114.36M

NOWL vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF	-63.41%	-43.64%
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust	-6.21%	28.84%

Correlation

The correlation between NOWL and BAR is -0.02, 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.	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025	-0.02

Return for Risk

NOWL vs. BAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOWL

NOWL Risk / Return Rank: 2
NOWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
NOWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
NOWL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
NOWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
NOWL Martin Ratio Rank: 2

BAR

BAR Risk / Return Rank: 30
BAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
BAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
BAR Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
BAR Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

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 ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.72	0.82	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.13	1.18	-2.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	1.17	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.92	0.87	-1.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	1.88	-3.22

NOWL vs. BAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOWL Sharpe Ratio is -0.72, which is lower than the BAR Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOWL and BAR, 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

NOWL vs. BAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOWL drawdown since its inception was -86.64%, which is greater than BAR's maximum drawdown of -26.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOWL and BAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOWL	BAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.64%	-26.32%	-60.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-85.16%	-26.32%	-58.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.32%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-80.50%	-25.04%	-55.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-52.61%	-6.75%	-45.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	58.33%	12.15%	+46.18%

Volatility

NOWL vs. BAR - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) has a higher volatility of 34.79% compared to GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) at 6.32%. This indicates that NOWL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NOWL	BAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.79%	6.32%	+28.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	98.80%	23.33%	+75.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	108.39%	27.91%	+80.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	106.58%	18.38%	+88.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	106.58%	16.61%	+89.97%

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.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOWL and BAR in my portfolio?

NOWL and BAR 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.

Which is riskier, NOWL or BAR?

NOWL has higher volatility (34.79%) compared to BAR (6.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOWL dropped -86.64% vs BAR's -26.32%.

Which ETF is better, NOWL or BAR?

On 1-year performance, BAR leads with 20.39% vs -76.52% for NOWL. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BAR has been the lower-risk option at 6.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NOWL or BAR?

Over the 1-year period, BAR has performed better with a 20.39% return vs -76.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NOWL or BAR?

BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for NOWL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NOWL or BAR?

NOWL and BAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NOWL and BAR?

NOWL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BAR is Gold. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for NOWL and 0.17% for BAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.82 vs -0.72), 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.