© 2026 Sparkline Capital LP. All rights reserved.

For informational purposes only. Not investment advice or a recommendation of any security or fund. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Disclosures | Methodology |

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Selection

Selected (1/4)

MSR

Seeded with the selected fund at 100%

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

Options Funds · 830 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

MSR

Sector

GraniteShares Autocallable MSTR ETF

AUM
$0M
Inception
5/13/2026
Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
MSR
GraniteShares Autocallable MSTR ETF
-37.1%-68.4%56.5%-1.27-50.9%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 5/13/2026 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
MSR
GraniteShares Autocallable MSTR ETF
-36.3%-3.7%-3.8%-2.6%5.8%-36.3%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.

Annual Returns

Name
YTD
MSR
GraniteShares Autocallable MSTR ETF
-36.3%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.

Correlation Matrix

Benchmark

Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.

Factor Regression

Not enough overlapping history for a regression in this period.
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth).

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund ProfileSector

Type
ETF
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Options
Region
Peer Group Benchmark
Peer Group
Options - Income (295 peers)
AUM
$0M
Inception
5/13/2026
Holdings (Reported)
6
Equity
16%
Derivatives
16%
Net Equity Exposure
200%
ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the prospectus fee table, else the SEC annual shareholder report, else market data. Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 6/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 6/30/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Options Funds

None of the selected metrics are scored for MSR — switch the picker to All, or add metrics under Metrics (top right).

ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); the shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Options Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 6/30/2026.

Country Exposure

Level
100.0%
100.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level
100.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified holdings — every position we can identify, with cash and unidentified positions excluded — not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy0.0%
New Economy100.0%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)0.0%
Large ($70–500B)0.0%
Mid ($10–70B)100.0%
Small ($1–10B)0.0%
Micro (<$1B)0.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 16% of net assets) — they are not portfolio weights. Company size bands by holding market cap: Mega >$500B, Large $70–500B, Mid $10–70B, Small $1–10B, Micro <$1B. Old vs New Economy partitions Sparkline's 48 industries: New = technology, internet platforms and entertainment, e-commerce, payments, pharma/biotech/medtech, and renewable energy; Old = everything else. Shares are of classified holdings and sum to 100%. Size shares are of scored holdings weight. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

6 positions

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1Treasury Bill-
532.31
--USA
2MicroStrategyMSTR
21.95
TechnologySoftwareUSA
3MicroStrategyMSTR
20.79
TechnologySoftwareUSA
4MicroStrategyMSTR
19.73
TechnologySoftwareUSA
5MicroStrategyMSTR
18.97
TechnologySoftwareUSA
6MicroStrategyMSTR
18.24
TechnologySoftwareUSA
ⓘ Methodology

Sector, country and factor detail need a security match; the share of weight that matched is a member figure, so the rows without one appear here with those columns blank. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Options Funds

Total Holdings6
Effective Holdings1.4
Top 10 Weight632.0%
Max Position532.3%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)532%
Top Country (of Net Assets)100%
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for definitions. Solid blue dots mark the fund: percentage rows on a 0–100% scale, holdings counts log-scaled across the clean-universe 5th–95th percentile range. The shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Options Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
MSR
GraniteShares Autocallable MSTR ETF
Peer Group
295 funds
Peer Asset Class
830 funds
YTD Return
-36.29%6.95%27.62%1
1Y Return
---
3Y Return (Ann.)
---
5Y Return (Ann.)
---
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
---
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (329 share classes across 295 funds). One share class shown per fund — the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class; percentile ranks and medians are computed against the same deduped set. Quartile chips fill the layer the fund's rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). Funds without a full return history rank only on the horizons they cover.

Similar Funds

See more rows — create a free account▾

Nearest funds across the whole universe, by holdings and behavior — the peer taxonomy is ignored, so matches can come from any category.

Top Similarity99
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
FundPeer Group
1TSL
GraniteShares 1.25x Long TSLA Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
2AAPB
GraniteShares 2x Long AAPL Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
3AMDL
GraniteShares 2x Long AMD Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
4AMZZ
GraniteShares 2x Long AMZN Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
5CONI
GraniteShares 2x Short COIN Daily ETF
Inverse - Equity
Inverse - Equity
99--
6PTIR
GraniteShares 2x Long PLTR Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
7CRWL
GraniteShares 2x Long CRWD Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
8MULL
GraniteShares 2x Long MU Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
9TSMU
GraniteShares 2x Long TSM Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--
10DLLL
GraniteShares 2x Long DELL Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
99--

The method columns are members-only — create a free account to see these figures.

ⓘ Methodology

Rows are the consensus top matches (a fund must place in at least two methods' top 250 to qualify, and matches missing more than one of this fund's own methods are not ranked — a row scored on fewer methods is a noisier estimate, not a better match). Click a method column to see that method's own top matches across the whole universe instead. Gray (N) beside each method's metric is that fund's rank in the whole universe on that method. Similarity is a percentile among match-grade fund pairs, 0–100 — 87 means the pair is closer than 87% of the strongest matches in the universe, averaged across the methods — so it compares across funds: index clones tie at the top with thousands of other clone pairs, so scores top out in the high 80s to 90s, while a one-of-a-kind fund's best match can score in the 30s. Rows are ordered by the Consensus Rank — the geometric mean of those universe ranks, shown in each cell's tooltip — and the score is held down the list to the level of the closest match above it, so equal scores mean equally close and the number reads as a floor. A dash means that method has no figure for the pair at all (one of them lacks the holdings or return history it needs). Hover a column header for each method's definition. The “Top…” strips above compare against every fund's own top match across the whole universe (they deliberately don't follow the Peer Universe selector); Top Similarity is simply the best match's score, with no reference band; the Holdings and Active Tilt strips carry no reference band because computing every fund's best book overlap would require a full holdings scan per fund — the dot stands alone on its natural 0–100% scale. One share class shown per fund, and a fund's own sister share classes are excluded from its Top-match strips. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Consensus Rank is the geometric mean of the match's universe-wide rank across the methods (#1.0 = top match on every one). Holdings Overlap = common-holdings weight (sum of the minimum weight across shared positions, long only). Active Tilt Overlap = the same statistic on active weights (holdings minus the fund's own default benchmark, floored at 0), which strips the benchmark ballast that dominates raw overlap.