BULZ vs. GDXD
BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) and GDXD (MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040) are both exchange-traded funds - BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%), while GDXD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BULZ returned 62.45%/yr vs -84.35%/yr for GDXD. Their -0.24 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
BULZ vs. GDXD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BULZ achieves a 25.41% return, which is significantly higher than GDXD's -47.15% return.
BULZ
- 1D
- 10.00%
- 1M
- -9.61%
- 6M
- 24.24%
- YTD
- 25.41%
- 1Y
- 91.64%
- 3Y*
- 62.45%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.31%
GDXD
- 1D
- -8.36%
- 1M
- 1.15%
- 6M
- -18.51%
- YTD
- -47.15%
- 1Y
- -92.60%
- 3Y*
- -84.35%
- 5Y*
- -73.81%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -71.17%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $25.71M | $28.40M | $43.12M | |
| $19.45M | $20.78M | $29.79M |
BULZ vs. GDXD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs | 25.41% | 60.09% | 54.09% | 394.22% | -92.26% | 9.17% |
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 | -47.15% | -97.53% | -57.78% | -52.35% | -52.56% | -20.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between BULZ and GDXD is -0.40, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021 | -0.24 |
The correlation between BULZ and GDXD shifts across timeframes, from -0.40 (1 year) to -0.24 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
BULZ vs. GDXD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BULZ
GDXD
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Technology
BULZ
GDXD
-
Communication Services
BULZ
GDXD
-
Consumer Cyclical
BULZ
GDXD
-
Financial Services
BULZ
GDXD
-
Basic Materials
BULZ
-
GDXD
Consumer Defensive
BULZ
-
GDXD
-
Energy
BULZ
-
GDXD
-
Healthcare
BULZ
-
GDXD
-
Industrials
BULZ
-
GDXD
-
Real Estate
BULZ
-
GDXD
-
Utilities
BULZ
-
GDXD
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BULZ vs. GDXD — Risk / Return Rank
BULZ
GDXD
BULZ vs. GDXD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) and MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| BULZ | GDXD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 0.84 | +0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.67 | -0.97 | +2.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.75 | -1.14 | +4.89 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BULZ vs. GDXD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BULZ drawdown since its inception was -94.44%, smaller than the maximum GDXD drawdown of -99.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BULZ and GDXD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BULZ | GDXD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -94.44% | -99.96% | +5.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -55.29% | -95.33% | +40.04% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -67.96% | -99.86% | +31.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -99.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -40.91% | -99.93% | +59.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -57.56% | -72.61% | +15.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 24.55% | 83.17% | -58.62% |
Volatility
BULZ vs. GDXD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) is 32.71%, while MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) has a volatility of 38.92%. This indicates that BULZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BULZ | GDXD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 32.71% | 38.92% | -6.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 70.17% | 114.18% | -44.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 85.84% | 147.12% | -61.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 92.15% | 112.72% | -20.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 92.15% | 110.98% | -18.83% |
BULZ vs. GDXD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both BULZ and GDXD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
BULZ vs. GDXD - Dividend Comparison
Neither BULZ nor GDXD has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
BULZ and GDXD have a correlation of -0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXD has higher volatility (38.92%) compared to BULZ (32.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BULZ dropped -94.44% vs GDXD's -99.96%.
On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 62.45% vs -84.35% for GDXD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, BULZ has been the lower-risk option at 32.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 62.45% return vs -84.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BULZ and GDXD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
BULZ and GDXD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BULZ is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while GDXD is Inverse Equities. BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%), while GDXD tracks S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index.
BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs -0.63), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for BULZ and GDXD
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer