Data as of .
INTW vs LINT: which held to its multiple?
Over the days both have traded, INTW finished 4.0 points from its stated multiple and LINT 3.7.
ETFIQ Decay Resistance Score: LINT scores higher
Did it keep up with its own daily multiple, compounded day by day?
A percentile among the 391 leveraged ETFs, long, over three months. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All leveraged ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Multiple would give | Difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| INTW | LINT | INTW | LINT | INTW | LINT | |
| 1 month | −0.1% | +0.2% | +3.9% | +3.9% | −4.0 pts | −3.7 pts |
| 3 months | −43.1% | −42.5% | −34.7% | −34.7% | −8.4 pts | −7.8 pts |
| 6 months | +233.4% | +238.8% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| 1 year | +757.1% | not published | not meaningful | not published | not meaningful | not published |
| Since launch | +565.1% | +371.9% | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful | not meaningful |
| INTW GraniteShares 2x Long INTC Daily ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of INTC | LINT Direxion Daily INTC Bull 2X ETF Aims to return twice the daily move of INTC | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | GraniteShares | Direxion |
| Sets out to return | +2x | +2x |
| On | INTC | INTC |
| Segment | company | company |
| Fund returned, 3 months | −43.1% | −42.5% |
| Underlying returned, 3 months | −17.4% | −17.4% |
| What the stated multiple implies, 3 months | −34.7% | −34.7% |
| Difference from stated, 3 months | −8.4 pts | −7.8 pts |
| Fund returned, 1 year or since launch | +757.1% | +371.9% |
| Difference from stated, over that window | not available | not available |
| Underlying volatility | 76% | 76% |
| Difference over the days both have traded | −4.0 pts | −3.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 1.50% | 0.97% |
| Launched | Feb 13, 2025 | Nov 19, 2025 |
INTW in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: INTW returned −43.1% where its own daily promise gave −40.8%, 2.4 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times INTC's −17.4% implies −34.7%, which makes INTW look 8.4 points short. 6.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. INTW aims to return +2 times INTC's move each day, then resets. Over one day it does that. Over longer, the daily results compound, so the total is not +2 times the period's move: in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less, and in a steady run it can be more. INTC moved at 76% annualized over that window. That is what decides how far the two figures separate: the same fund on a calm underlying and a violent one is a different product.
LINT in plain words
Three months to Sep 11, 2026: LINT returned −42.5% where its own daily promise gave −40.8%, 1.8 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times INTC's −17.4% implies −34.7%, which makes LINT look 7.8 points short. LINT aims to return +2 times INTC's move each day, then resets.
Questions people ask
- Which came closer to its stated multiple, INTW or LINT?
- Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, INTW finished 8.4 points from what its multiple implies and LINT finished 7.8 points from its own, so LINT came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
- Are INTW and LINT levered on the same thing?
- Yes. Both are levered on INTC, INTW at +2 times and LINT at +2 times the daily move.
- Which one decays faster, INTW or LINT?
- Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window INTW’s moved at 76% annualized and LINT’s at 76%, so INTW has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
- Can I hold INTW or LINT for a year?
- Both reset every day, so the multiple in the name applies to a single day and the daily results compound. Over a year the total is not the multiple times the year’s move, and in a market that falls and comes back it is reliably less. ETFIQ makes no recommendation either way.
- Which is cheaper, INTW or LINT?
- INTW charges 1.50% a year and LINT charges 0.97%, so LINT is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, INTW against LINT, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/INTW-LINT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.