Get the weekly note
ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

Data as of .

MSFC vs MSFL: which held to its multiple?

Over the days both have traded, MSFC finished 1.1 points from its stated multiple and MSFL 1.0.

Corgi MSFT 2x Daily ETF and GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF, side by side, leveraged ETFs on ETFIQ.

+68.5%MSFC returned, 3 months
+51.7%MSFL returned, 3 months
+2.2 ptsMSFC from its stated multiple
−2.5 ptsMSFL from its stated multiple
MSFC1.1 pts short of its label · 1 month to Sep 11, 2026
MSFT +0.8% ×2 implies+1.7%MSFC returned+0.6%MSFT +0.8% ×2 implies+1.7%MSFC returned+0.6%
MSFL2.5 pts short of its label · 3 months to Sep 11, 2026
MSFT +27.1% ×2 implies+54.2%MSFL returned+51.7%MSFT +27.1% ×2 implies+54.2%MSFL returned+51.7%

Performance, window by window

MSFC and MSFL over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ.
WindowTotal returnMultiple would giveDifference
MSFCMSFLMSFCMSFLMSFCMSFL
1 month+0.6%+0.7%+1.7%+1.7%−1.1 pts−1.0 pts
3 monthsnot published+51.7%not published+54.2%not published−2.5 pts
6 monthsnot published+41.5%not published+51.6%not published−10.1 pts
1 yearnot published−17.6%not published−0.5%not published−17.1 pts
Since launch+68.5%−2.9%+66.2%+42.2%+2.2 pts−45.1 pts
Open the live comparison on ETFIQ
MSFC and MSFL on the same fields, as of Sep 11, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
MSFC
Corgi MSFT 2x Daily ETF
Aims to return twice the daily move of Microsoft (MSFT)
MSFL
GraniteShares 2x Long MSFT Daily ETF
Aims to return twice the daily move of Microsoft (MSFT)
IssuerCorgiGraniteShares
Sets out to return+2x+2x
OnMSFTMSFT
Segmentcompanycompany
Fund returned, 3 months+0.6%+51.7%
Underlying returned, 3 months+0.8%+27.1%
What the stated multiple implies, 3 months+1.7%+54.2%
Difference from stated, 3 months−1.1 pts−2.5 pts
Fund returned, 1 year or since launch+68.5%−17.6%
Difference from stated, over that window+2.2 pts−17.1 pts
Underlying volatility21%43%
Difference over the days both have traded−1.1 pts−1.0 pts
Expense ratio0.45%1.15%
LaunchedJun 30, 2026Mar 18, 2024

MSFC in plain words

One month to Sep 11, 2026: MSFC returned +0.6% where its own daily promise gave +1.3%, 0.7 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times MSFT's 0.8% implies +1.7%, which makes MSFC look 1.1 points short. 0.4 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MSFC aims to return +2 times MSFT'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. MSFT moved at 21% 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.

MSFL in plain words

Three months to Sep 11, 2026: MSFL returned +51.7% where its own daily promise gave +55.1%, 3.5 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and +2 times MSFT's 27.1% implies +54.2%, which makes MSFL look 2.5 points short. 1.0 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any +2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. MSFL aims to return +2 times MSFT's move each day, then resets. MSFT moved at 43% annualized over that window.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, MSFC or MSFL?
Over the window to Sep 11, 2026, MSFC finished 1.1 points from what its multiple implies and MSFL finished 2.5 points from its own, so MSFC came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are MSFC and MSFL levered on the same thing?
Yes. Both are levered on Microsoft, MSFC at +2 times and MSFL at +2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, MSFC or MSFL?
Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window MSFC’s moved at 21% annualized and MSFL’s at 43%, so MSFL has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold MSFC or MSFL 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, MSFC or MSFL?
MSFC charges 0.45% a year and MSFL charges 1.15%, so MSFC 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.

MSFC against MSFL, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 11, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, MSFC against MSFL, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/MSFC-MSFL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

How every figure is computed · Standards and sources