PLA vs. AMDL

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

PLA (GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF) and AMDL (GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PLA is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while AMDL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (200%). PLA is actively managed, while AMDL is passively managed. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 1.07% expense ratio.

Performance

PLA vs. AMDL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF (PLA) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

PLA

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 2.79%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMDL

• 1D: 3.35%
• 1M: -16.33%
• 6M: 234.39%
• YTD: 286.43%
• 1Y: 485.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PLA vs. AMDL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
PLA GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF	1.66%
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	26.96%

Correlation

The correlation between PLA and AMDL is 0.08, 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 May 19, 2026	0.08

Return for Risk

PLA vs. AMDL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PLA

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

AMDL

AMDL Risk / Return Rank: 93
AMDL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
AMDL Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
AMDL Omega Ratio Rank: 89
AMDL Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
AMDL Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

PLA vs. AMDL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF (PLA) and GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF (AMDL). 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.

	PLA	AMDL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	3.56	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.35	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.42	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	8.72	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	16.74	—

Drawdowns

PLA vs. AMDL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PLA drawdown since its inception was -12.39%, smaller than the maximum AMDL drawdown of -88.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PLA and AMDL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PLA	AMDL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.39%	-88.63%	+76.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-56.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.90%	-27.38%	+24.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.36%	-46.77%	+42.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	29.16%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PLA	AMDL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	41.42%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	106.89%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.73%	137.68%	-114.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.73%	119.17%	-96.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.73%	119.17%	-96.44%

PLA vs. AMDL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PLA and AMDL have an expense ratio of 1.07%.

Dividends

PLA vs. AMDL - Dividend Comparison

PLA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.55%, while AMDL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM
AMDL GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF	0.00%
PLA GraniteShares Autocallable PLTR ETF	3.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PLA and AMDL in my portfolio?

PLA and AMDL have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PLA or AMDL?

Both ETFs have the same 1.07% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PLA or AMDL?

PLA and AMDL have the same expense ratio: 1.07% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PLA or AMDL?

PLA has the higher dividend yield at 3.55%, compared with 0.00% for AMDL.

What is the main difference between PLA and AMDL?

PLA is categorized as Derivative Income, while AMDL is Leveraged Equities.