NOWL vs. CIFG

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

NOWL (GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF) and CIFG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. NOWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CIFG.

Performance

NOWL vs. CIFG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOWL achieves a -67.11% return, which is significantly lower than CIFG's -26.74% return.

NOWL

• 1D: -1.46%
• 1M: 0.86%
• 6M: -54.71%
• YTD: -67.11%
• 1Y: -81.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CIFG

• 1D: -21.93%
• 1M: -59.11%
• 6M: -46.89%
• YTD: -26.74%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NOWL vs. CIFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF	-67.11%	-21.77%
CIFG Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF	-26.74%	-32.52%

Correlation

The correlation between NOWL and CIFG is -0.07, 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 Dec 11, 2025	-0.07

Return for Risk

NOWL vs. CIFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOWL

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

CIFG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

NOWL vs. CIFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) and Leverage Shares 2X Long CIFR Daily ETF (CIFG). 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	CIFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.78	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.41	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.94	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.38	—	—

Drawdowns

NOWL vs. CIFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOWL drawdown since its inception was -86.64%, which is greater than CIFG's maximum drawdown of -71.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOWL and CIFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOWL	CIFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.64%	-71.71%	-14.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-86.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-82.47%	-66.62%	-15.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-51.31%	-36.36%	-14.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	58.84%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	NOWL	CIFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.13%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	97.95%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	104.70%	206.17%	-101.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	104.50%	206.17%	-101.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	104.50%	206.17%	-101.67%

NOWL vs. CIFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CIFG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOWL vs. CIFG - Dividend Comparison

Neither NOWL nor CIFG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOWL and CIFG in my portfolio?

NOWL and CIFG have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NOWL or CIFG?

On fees, CIFG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NOWL or CIFG?

CIFG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for NOWL.

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

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

What is the main difference between NOWL and CIFG?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for NOWL and 0.75% for CIFG.