NOWL vs. MSFL

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

NOWL (GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF) and MSFL (GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF) are both Leveraged Equities funds from GraniteShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NOWL returned -76.52% vs -33.16% for MSFL. Their 0.52 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NOWL charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for MSFL.

Performance

NOWL vs. MSFL - 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 MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). 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 MSFL's -18.68% return.

NOWL

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

MSFL

• 1D: 5.79%
• 1M: 37.76%
• 6M: 5.09%
• YTD: -18.68%
• 1Y: -33.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -5.56%

*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)
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	$37.77M	$32.36M	$34.28M
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF	$112.35M	$97.45M	$114.36M

NOWL vs. MSFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NOWL GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF	-63.41%	-43.64%
MSFL GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF	-18.68%	-11.41%

Correlation

The correlation between NOWL and MSFL is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025	0.52

The correlation between NOWL and MSFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NOWL vs. MSFL — 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

MSFL

MSFL Risk / Return Rank: 5
MSFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Omega Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
MSFL Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. MSFL - 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 MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL). 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	MSFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.72	-0.57	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.13	-0.59	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	0.93	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.92	-0.57	-0.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	-0.95	-0.38

NOWL vs. MSFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOWL Sharpe Ratio is -0.72, which is comparable to the MSFL Sharpe Ratio of -0.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOWL and MSFL, 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. MSFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOWL drawdown since its inception was -86.64%, which is greater than MSFL's maximum drawdown of -62.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOWL and MSFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOWL	MSFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.64%	-62.08%	-24.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-85.16%	-62.08%	-23.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-80.50%	-36.63%	-43.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-52.61%	-23.68%	-28.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	58.33%	37.31%	+21.02%

Volatility

NOWL vs. MSFL - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long NOW Daily ETF (NOWL) has a higher volatility of 34.79% compared to GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF (MSFL) at 29.71%. This indicates that NOWL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MSFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NOWL	MSFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	34.79%	29.71%	+5.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	98.80%	51.38%	+47.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	108.39%	63.24%	+45.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	106.58%	54.34%	+52.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	106.58%	54.34%	+52.24%

NOWL vs. MSFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOWL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than MSFL's 1.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOWL vs. MSFL - Dividend Comparison

Neither NOWL nor MSFL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOWL and MSFL in my portfolio?

NOWL and MSFL have a correlation of 0.54, 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 MSFL?

NOWL has higher volatility (34.79%) compared to MSFL (29.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOWL dropped -86.64% vs MSFL's -62.08%.

Which ETF is better, NOWL or MSFL?

On 1-year performance, MSFL leads with -33.16% vs -76.52% for NOWL. On fees, MSFL is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, MSFL has been the lower-risk option at 29.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NOWL or MSFL?

Over the 1-year period, MSFL has performed better with a -33.16% 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 MSFL?

MSFL is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for NOWL.

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

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

What is the main difference between NOWL and MSFL?

Their fees differ too: 1.50% for NOWL and 1.15% for MSFL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.57 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.