PLTM vs. FBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PLTM (GraniteShares Platinum Trust) and FBL (GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PLTM is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Platinum London PM Fix ($/ozt), while FBL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares. PLTM is passively managed, while FBL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PLTM returned 22.22%/yr vs 33.25%/yr for FBL. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PLTM charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for FBL.

Performance

PLTM vs. FBL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PLTM achieves a -9.33% return, which is significantly higher than FBL's -19.72% return.

PLTM

• 1D: -3.82%
• 1M: -4.28%
• YTD: -9.33%
• 6M: 11.67%
• 1Y: 71.85%
• 3Y*: 22.22%
• 5Y*: 9.22%
• 10Y*: —

FBL

• 1D: 8.48%
• 1M: 2.55%
• YTD: -19.72%
• 6M: -15.34%
• 1Y: -29.78%
• 3Y*: 33.25%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PLTM vs. FBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PLTM GraniteShares Platinum Trust	-9.33%	124.46%	-8.91%	-8.10%	3.70%
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	-19.72%	0.50%	112.72%	341.59%	-1.22%

Correlation

The correlation between PLTM and FBL is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2022	0.12

PLTM vs. FBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PLTM	FBL
Real Estate	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	66.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PLTM vs. FBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PLTM

PLTM Risk / Return Rank: 36
PLTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
PLTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
PLTM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
PLTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
PLTM Martin Ratio Rank: 30

FBL

FBL Risk / Return Rank: 5
FBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
FBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
FBL Omega Ratio Rank: 6
FBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
FBL Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

PLTM vs. FBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM) 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.

	PLTM	FBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	-0.42	+1.83
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	-0.22	+2.01
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	0.97	+0.29
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.09	-0.49	+2.58
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	4.43	-0.91	+5.34
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PLTM vs. FBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PLTM Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is higher than the FBL Sharpe Ratio of -0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PLTM 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PLTM	FBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	-0.42	+1.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.24	1.12	-0.88

Drawdowns

PLTM vs. FBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PLTM drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, smaller than the maximum FBL drawdown of -61.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PLTM and FBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PLTM	FBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.32%	-61.15%	+18.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.52%	-61.03%	+26.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.52%	-61.15%	+26.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.02%	-47.97%	+14.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.55%	-16.41%	-2.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.28%	32.76%	-16.48%

Volatility

PLTM vs. FBL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM) is 10.88%, while GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF (FBL) has a volatility of 17.63%. This indicates that PLTM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PLTM	FBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.88%	17.63%	-6.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.45%	53.15%	-7.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.40%	70.42%	-19.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.83%	71.06%	-38.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.98%	71.06%	-40.08%

PLTM vs. FBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PLTM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FBL's 1.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PLTM vs. FBL - Dividend Comparison

PLTM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBL GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF	2.58%	2.07%	0.00%	51.58%
PLTM GraniteShares Platinum Trust	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PLTM and FBL in my portfolio?

PLTM and FBL have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PLTM or FBL?

FBL has higher volatility (17.63%) compared to PLTM (10.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PLTM dropped -42.32% vs FBL's -61.15%.

Which ETF is better, PLTM or FBL?

On 3-year performance, FBL leads with 33.25% vs 22.22% for PLTM. On fees, PLTM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PLTM has been the lower-risk option at 10.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PLTM or FBL?

Over the 3-year period, FBL has performed better with a 33.25% return vs 22.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PLTM or FBL?

PLTM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for FBL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PLTM or FBL?

FBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 0.00% for PLTM.

What is the main difference between PLTM and FBL?

PLTM is categorized as Precious Metals, while FBL is Leveraged Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PLTM and 1.15% for FBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PLTM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs -0.42), 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.