NOWL vs. CRMG
NOWL (GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF) and CRMG (Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NOWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CRMG.
Performance
NOWL vs. CRMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with NOWL having a -62.15% return and CRMG slightly lower at -64.77%.
NOWL
- 1D
- 6.48%
- 1M
- 14.11%
- 6M
- -56.11%
- YTD
- -62.15%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CRMG
- 1D
- 9.77%
- 1M
- 3.87%
- 6M
- -63.02%
- YTD
- -64.77%
- 1Y
- -66.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NOWL vs. CRMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF | -62.15% | -43.64% |
CRMG Leverage Shares 2X Long CRM Daily ETF | -64.77% | -5.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between NOWL and CRMG is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025 | 0.73 |
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. CRMG — Risk / Return Rank
NOWL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CRMG
NOWL vs. CRMG - 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 CRM Daily ETF (CRMG). 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 | CRMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 0.84 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.87 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -1.48 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NOWL vs. CRMG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NOWL drawdown since its inception was -86.64%, which is greater than CRMG's maximum drawdown of -79.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOWL and CRMG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NOWL | CRMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.64% | -79.83% | -6.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -75.82% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -79.83% | -74.22% | -5.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -50.94% | -40.72% | -10.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 44.75% | — |
Volatility
NOWL vs. CRMG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NOWL | CRMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 22.66% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 65.38% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 104.54% | 77.73% | +26.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 104.54% | 75.78% | +28.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 104.54% | 75.78% | +28.76% |
NOWL vs. CRMG - Expense Ratio Comparison
NOWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CRMG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
NOWL vs. CRMG - Dividend Comparison
Neither NOWL nor CRMG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOWL and CRMG have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CRMG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CRMG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for NOWL.
NOWL and CRMG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for NOWL and 0.75% for CRMG.
Find the right allocation for NOWL and CRMG
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