Verdicts genuinely change. Free email alert the moment LCDL's does — no target price to set, unlike "Alert" above.
Whether this fund clears the published standards, and the filings behind that answer. The screen runs first and nothing on the trading side can override it.
Structure, momentum, positioning and levels. Separate from the Sharia verdict above, which this side never overrides.
GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF · GraniteShares ETF Trust
2 holdings
This fund holds short positions, so exposure is counted gross — long and short both count as exposure rather than netting off, and the weights below therefore sum to 366% of net assets rather than 100%. Shares of the portfolio are shown as shares of that gross exposure.
NON-COMPLIANT At least 166.00% of portfolio weight is in non-compliant holdings — already over the 5% threshold, so the verdict is settled whatever the unmatched 200% turns out to be. Matching more holdings can only raise this share, never lower it.
166.00% of that is conventional interest-bearing debt, identified from the fund's own filing rather than by screening an issuer. Sukuk are deliberately excluded from this test and are never counted here.
2 holdings, 1 matched (45% of weight). Portfolio as of 2026-06-30, filed 2026-08-31. Source: SEC Form N-PORT.
Portfolio shares are withheld: coverage is below the floor needed to state one. The holdings themselves are below, because the names are evidence you can check.
| Holding | Status | Weight | Every methodology, and the debt ratio behind it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marex | UNSCREENED | 199.93% | no in-house ratios for this holding |
| Treasury Bill | NON_COMPLIANT | 166.00% | no in-house ratios for this holding |
| Non-compliant holding | Weight |
|---|---|
| Treasury Bill | 166.00% |
Whether the technical picture shows an edge right now. Separate from the Sharia verdict, which this side never overrides.
GraniteShares 2x Long LCID Daily ETF (LCDL) is currently considered not halal (non-compliant), per our own look-through to its filed holdings. See its filed holdings and the weight breakdown below for the reasoning.
HTR reads the fund's filed holdings and screens each one, then reports the result by weight. A holding it cannot cover far enough is reported as unrated rather than counted as a pass.
| Holding | Weight | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Marexnot matched to a ticker | 199.93% | Not screened |
| Treasury Billnot matched to a ticker | 166.00% | Non-compliant |
Top 2 of 2 holdings, 365.9% of the fund by weight. Every holding is screened, not only these.
The positions keeping this fund short of 100% compliant by weight.
Verdict history for LCDL. A verdict that never moved is recorded too, so a quiet history reads as measured rather than missing.
ℹ️ no compliance scan has run for 3 days - this is not a reading of today
Market structure by timeframe, read from real bars. A bias per timeframe rather than a forecast — timeframes disagreeing is information, not noise.
The questions worth asking about any verdict on this page, answered plainly.
No. HTR reads the fund's filed holdings and screens each one, then reports the result by weight. A fund marketed as Islamic still gets the same look-through as any other.
It is the share of the fund whose holdings HTR cannot cover far enough to rate. It is reported as unrated rather than counted as compliant, because a holding nobody screened should not look like one that passed.
It matters, and it is noted, but it does not replace the look-through. The board's judgement and the holdings screen are shown separately so you can see when they agree and when they do not.
When the fund files new holdings, and on a rolling basis besides. The date on the verdict above is the last time this fund was actually recomputed.
Open research, not a fatwa. HTR applies published screening standards to filings and publishes what they say, including when they disagree. Nothing here is financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell. Verdicts can change when new filings land.
Same screen, different answers. Comparison is where the standards disagreeing becomes useful rather than confusing.
Peer screening computing — it will appear here on its own.
Plain-language summary of the evidence already on this page — the Sharia screen, structure, momentum, and order flow above. It explains the read; it doesn't make the call. Generated on demand (a live AI call), never run automatically.