PFFL vs. MULL

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

PFFL (ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN) and MULL (GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PFFL is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the Solactive Preferred Stock ETF Index, while MULL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. PFFL is passively managed, while MULL is actively managed. Over the past year, PFFL returned -0.36% vs 2454.81% for MULL. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PFFL charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for MULL.

Performance

PFFL vs. MULL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) and GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PFFL achieves a -3.27% return, which is significantly lower than MULL's 436.29% return.

PFFL

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -3.46%
• 6M: -7.41%
• YTD: -3.27%
• 1Y: -0.36%
• 3Y*: 3.48%
• 5Y*: -6.81%
• 10Y*: —

MULL

• 1D: -11.30%
• 1M: -37.61%
• 6M: 295.95%
• YTD: 436.29%
• 1Y: 2,454.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PFFL vs. MULL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PFFL ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN	-3.27%	2.18%	-9.93%
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	436.29%	558.51%	-39.23%

Correlation

The correlation between PFFL and MULL is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2024	0.27

Return for Risk

PFFL vs. MULL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFFL

PFFL Risk / Return Rank: 9
PFFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
PFFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
PFFL Omega Ratio Rank: 9
PFFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
PFFL Martin Ratio Rank: 9

MULL

MULL Risk / Return Rank: 98
MULL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MULL Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
MULL Omega Ratio Rank: 95
MULL Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MULL Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

PFFL vs. MULL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) and GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL). 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.

	PFFL	MULL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.02	16.22	-16.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.08	4.90	-4.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.62	-0.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.03	45.09	-45.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.06	142.83	-142.90

PFFL vs. MULL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFFL Sharpe Ratio is -0.02, which is lower than the MULL Sharpe Ratio of 16.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFFL and MULL, 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

PFFL vs. MULL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFFL drawdown since its inception was -80.68%, which is greater than MULL's maximum drawdown of -72.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFFL and MULL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PFFL	MULL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.68%	-72.29%	-8.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.92%	-55.18%	+43.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.41%	-55.18%	+14.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.68%	-21.04%	-7.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.63%	17.49%	-11.86%

Volatility

PFFL vs. MULL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) is 4.10%, while GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF (MULL) has a volatility of 64.12%. This indicates that PFFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MULL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PFFL	MULL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	64.12%	-60.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.00%	126.46%	-115.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.37%	153.61%	-137.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.70%	145.38%	-121.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	54.95%	145.38%	-90.43%

PFFL vs. MULL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFFL has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than MULL's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PFFL vs. MULL - Dividend Comparison

PFFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.72%, more than MULL's 0.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MULL GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF	0.07%	0.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFFL ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN	12.72%	13.27%	13.76%	13.71%	13.90%	8.82%	9.75%	11.21%	2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PFFL and MULL in my portfolio?

PFFL and MULL have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PFFL or MULL?

MULL has higher volatility (64.12%) compared to PFFL (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFFL dropped -80.68% vs MULL's -72.29%.

Which ETF is better, PFFL or MULL?

On 1-year performance, MULL leads with 2454.81% vs -0.36% for PFFL. On fees, PFFL is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, PFFL has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PFFL or MULL?

Over the 1-year period, MULL has performed better with a 2454.81% return vs -0.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PFFL or MULL?

PFFL is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MULL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PFFL or MULL?

PFFL has the higher dividend yield at 12.72%, compared with 0.07% for MULL.

What is the main difference between PFFL and MULL?

PFFL is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while MULL is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: UBS and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PFFL and 1.50% for MULL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MULL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.22 vs -0.02), 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.