Which came closer to its stated multiple, FBL or METQ?

Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FBL finished 7.7 points from what its multiple implies and METQ finished 10.8 points from its own, so FBL came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.

Are FBL and METQ levered on the same thing?

Yes. Both are levered on Meta Platforms, FBL at +2 times and METQ at -2 times the daily move.

Which one decays faster, FBL or METQ?

Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FBL’s moved at 49% annualized and METQ’s at 55%, so METQ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.

Can I hold FBL or METQ 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, FBL or METQ?

FBL charges 1.09% a year and METQ charges 1.49%, so FBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Share on X Download as PDF Open live

FBL vs METQ: which held to its multiple?

Over a month against its own daily promise, FBL finished 1.3 points short and METQ 0.2 points over. GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF and Tradr 2X Short META Daily ETF.

+29.1%

FBL returned, 3 months

−48.5%

METQ returned, since launch

−7.7 pts

FBL from its stated multiple

+18.5 pts

METQ from its stated multiple

FBL · 3 months to Sep 30, 20267.7 pts short of its stated multiple

FBL returned +29.1% while 2 times META's move would have been +36.8%

METQ · 1 month to Sep 30, 202610.8 pts ahead of its stated multiple

METQ returned −42.8% while −2 times META's move would have been −53.6%

Performance, window by window

	Total return		Multiple would give		Difference
Window	FBL	METQ	FBL	METQ	FBL	METQ
1 month	+55.5%	−42.8%	+53.6%	−53.6%	+1.9 pts	+10.8 pts
3 months	+29.1%	not published	+36.8%	not published	−7.7 pts	not published
6 months	+35.2%	not published	+50.8%	not published	−15.6 pts	not published
1 year	−25.3%	not published	−1.9%	not published	−23.4 pts	not published
3 years	+159.8%	not published	not meaningful	not published	not meaningful	not published
Since launch FBL Dec 2022 · METQ Aug 2026	+811.7%	−48.5%	not meaningful	−67.0%	not meaningful	+18.5 pts

FBL and METQ over each window. Every figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →

On the same fields

FBL

GraniteShares 2x Long META Daily ETF · Aims to return twice the daily move of Meta Platforms (META)

METQ

Tradr 2X Short META Daily ETF · Aims to return twice the opposite of the daily move of Meta Platforms (META)

Issuer GraniteShares Tradr

Sets out to return +2x -2x

Underlying asset META META

Segment company company

Fund returned, 3 months or since launch +29.1% −42.8%

Underlying returned, over that window +18.4% +26.8%

What the stated multiple implies, over that window +36.8% −53.6%

Difference from stated, over that window −7.7 pts +10.8 pts

Fund returned, 1 year or since launch −25.3% −48.5%

Difference from stated, over that window −23.4 pts +18.5 pts

Underlying volatility 49% 55%

Difference over the days both have traded +1.9 pts no shared window

Expense ratio 1.09% 1.49%

Launched Dec 13, 2022 Aug 18, 2026

Net assets $181m $8m

FBL and METQ on the same fields, as of Sep 30, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

FBL in plain words

Three months to Sep 30, 2026: FBL returned +29.1% where its own daily promise gave +32.2%, 3.1 points short. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and 2 times META's 18.4% implies +36.8%, which makes FBL look 7.7 points short. 4.6 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any 2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. FBL aims to return +2 times META'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. META moved at 49% 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.

METQ in plain words

One month to Sep 30, 2026: METQ returned −42.8% where its own daily promise gave −43.0%, 0.2 points over. Read the multiple against the whole window instead and −2 times META's 26.8% implies −53.6%, which makes METQ look 10.8 points over. 10.5 of that is daily compounding, which happens to any −2 times fund over the same path, and the rest is the fund. METQ aims to return -2 times META's move each day, then resets. 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. META moved at 55% annualized over that window.

Questions people ask

Which came closer to its stated multiple, FBL or METQ?: Over the window to Sep 30, 2026, FBL finished 7.7 points from what its multiple implies and METQ finished 10.8 points from its own, so FBL came closer. Neither figure predicts the next window: it depends on how much the underlying moves about.
Are FBL and METQ levered on the same thing?: Yes. Both are levered on Meta Platforms, FBL at +2 times and METQ at -2 times the daily move.
Which one decays faster, FBL or METQ?: Decay follows how much the underlying moves about. Over this window FBL’s moved at 49% annualized and METQ’s at 55%, so METQ has the rougher ride and, at the same multiple, loses more to compounding.
Can I hold FBL or METQ 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, FBL or METQ?: FBL charges 1.09% a year and METQ charges 1.49%, so FBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

FBL vs FBX FBL vs METD FBL vs METG FBL vs METU METQ vs METU METQ vs FBX METQ vs METD METQ vs METG

FBL on its own →METQ on its own →How every figure is computed →Standards and sources →

Where these figures came from

FBL filings on SEC EDGAR ↗FBL prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗GraniteShares page for FBL ↗METQ filings on SEC EDGAR ↗METQ prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Tradr website ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page

ETFIQ, FBL against METQ, data as of Sep 30, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/leverage/fbl-vs-metq

Open data

Free to use with attribution. Every figure is calculated from a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology.