PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NOWL vs. FBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NOWL vs. FBL - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOWL achieves a -63.41% return, which is significantly lower than FBL's -39.43% return.


NOWL

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

FBL

1D
6.66%
1M
-11.35%
6M
-47.34%
YTD
-39.43%
1Y
-56.50%
3Y*
12.26%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
61.04%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$25.01M$36.98M$35.23M
$112.35M$97.45M$114.36M

NOWL vs. FBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
NOWL
GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF
-63.41%-43.64%
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
-39.43%-23.61%

Correlation

The correlation between NOWL and FBL is 0.22, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025

0.21

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. FBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOWL
NOWL Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
NOWL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NOWL Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
NOWL Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
NOWL Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
NOWL Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

FBL
FBL Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 33
Omega Ratio Rank
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 00
Martin Ratio Rank
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. FBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) and GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL). 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.


NOWLFBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.86

0.87

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.92

-0.94

+0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.34

-1.52

+0.18

NOWL vs. FBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOWL Sharpe Ratio is -0.72, which is comparable to the FBL Sharpe Ratio of -0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOWL and FBL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

NOWL vs. FBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOWL drawdown since its inception was -86.64%, which is greater than FBL's maximum drawdown of -63.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOWL and FBL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NOWLFBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.64%

-63.20%

-23.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-85.16%

-63.09%

-22.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-63.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-80.50%

-60.75%

-19.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-52.61%

-18.01%

-34.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

58.33%

38.96%

+19.37%

Volatility

NOWL vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) has a higher volatility of 34.79% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) at 31.44%. This indicates that NOWL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NOWLFBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

34.79%

31.44%

+3.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

98.80%

61.35%

+37.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

108.39%

79.78%

+28.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

106.58%

72.81%

+33.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

106.58%

72.81%

+33.77%

NOWL vs. FBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBL's 1.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

NOWL vs. FBL - Dividend Comparison

NOWL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.42%.


PositionTTM202520242023
FBL
GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF
3.42%2.07%0.00%51.58%
NOWL
GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NOWL and FBL have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NOWL has higher volatility (34.79%) compared to FBL (31.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOWL dropped -86.64% vs FBL's -63.20%.

On 1-year performance, FBL leads with -56.50% vs -76.52% for NOWL. On fees, FBL is cheaper at 1.09% per year. On volatility, FBL has been the lower-risk option at 31.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FBL has performed better with a -56.50% return vs -76.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBL is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for NOWL.

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 3.42%, compared with 0.00% for NOWL.

Their fees differ too: 1.50% for NOWL and 1.09% for FBL.

NOWL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.72 vs -0.78), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NOWL and FBL

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