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 -0.03, 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 -55.17% return, which is significantly lower than BAR's 2.94% return.
NOWL
- 1D
- -15.19%
- 1M
- 53.22%
- YTD
- -55.17%
- 6M
- -63.42%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAR
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- -1.62%
- YTD
- 2.94%
- 6M
- 5.50%
- 1Y
- 32.26%
- 3Y*
- 31.38%
- 5Y*
- 18.41%
- 10Y*
- —
NOWL vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF | -55.17% | -42.58% |
BAR GraniteShares Gold Trust | 2.94% | 29.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between NOWL and BAR is -0.03, 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 16, 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
NOWL vs. BAR — Risk / Return Rank
NOWL
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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NOWL | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.23 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.03 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.76 | 0.90 | -1.66 |
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 -21.53%. 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% | -21.53% | -65.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -19.19% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.19% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -76.11% | -17.72% | -58.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.53% | -6.45% | -41.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 7.72% | — |
Volatility
NOWL vs. BAR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NOWL | BAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.46% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 23.03% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 103.33% | 26.43% | +76.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 103.33% | 17.90% | +85.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 103.33% | 16.38% | +86.95% |
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 -0.03, 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