DGZ vs. ASHS
DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) and ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DGZ is a Inverse Commodities fund tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%), while ASHS is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, DGZ returned -8.53%/yr vs 2.73%/yr for ASHS. Their -0.06 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. DGZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHS.
Performance
DGZ vs. ASHS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DGZ achieves a -2.82% return, which is significantly lower than ASHS's 9.68% return. Over the past 10 years, DGZ has underperformed ASHS with an annualized return of -8.53%, while ASHS has yielded a comparatively higher 2.73% annualized return.
DGZ
- 1D
- -12.96%
- 1M
- -14.11%
- 6M
- -3.97%
- YTD
- -2.82%
- 1Y
- -18.99%
- 3Y*
- -18.82%
- 5Y*
- -12.22%
- 10Y*
- -8.53%
- ALL TIME*
- -7.90%
ASHS
- 1D
- 2.09%
- 1M
- -7.69%
- 6M
- -0.68%
- YTD
- 9.68%
- 1Y
- 34.48%
- 3Y*
- 11.72%
- 5Y*
- 2.41%
- 10Y*
- 2.73%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.46%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $453.64K | $586.83K | $547.52K | |
| $26.88K | $31.34K | $38.49K |
DGZ vs. ASHS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | -2.82% | -32.55% | -16.46% | -4.75% | 4.93% | 1.53% | -20.80% | -13.42% | 4.88% | -11.36% |
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 9.68% | 39.48% | 2.68% | -10.03% | -24.78% | 17.66% | 28.22% | 24.53% | -35.91% | 7.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between DGZ and ASHS is -0.15, 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. | -0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | -0.11 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | -0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2014 | -0.06 |
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
DGZ vs. ASHS — Risk / Return Rank
DGZ
ASHS
DGZ vs. ASHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS). 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.
| DGZ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.55 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.23 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.53 | 1.98 | -2.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.92 | 5.78 | -6.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DGZ vs. ASHS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DGZ drawdown since its inception was -86.32%, which is greater than ASHS's maximum drawdown of -69.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and ASHS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DGZ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.32% | -69.90% | -16.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.14% | -17.46% | -18.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -59.54% | -34.13% | -25.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.54% | -47.81% | -13.73% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -71.49% | -47.81% | -23.68% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -83.35% | -36.69% | -46.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -57.95% | -48.35% | -9.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 20.66% | 5.98% | +14.68% |
Volatility
DGZ vs. ASHS - Volatility Comparison
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 24.24% compared to Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) at 12.62%. This indicates that DGZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DGZ | ASHS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 24.24% | 12.62% | +11.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 60.86% | 21.27% | +39.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 73.43% | 26.78% | +46.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 38.19% | 27.15% | +11.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.22% | 25.88% | +3.34% |
DGZ vs. ASHS - Expense Ratio Comparison
DGZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ASHS's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
DGZ vs. ASHS - Dividend Comparison
Neither DGZ nor ASHS has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.69% | 0.65% | 1.90% | 0.76% | 0.43% | 0.57% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 8.34% |
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DGZ and ASHS have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DGZ has higher volatility (24.24%) compared to ASHS (12.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs ASHS's -69.90%.
On 10-year performance, ASHS leads with 2.73% vs -8.53% for DGZ. On fees, ASHS is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASHS has been the lower-risk option at 12.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ASHS has performed better with a 2.73% return vs -8.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ASHS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.
DGZ and ASHS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
DGZ is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while ASHS is China Equities. DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%), while ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGZ and 0.65% for ASHS.
ASHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.29 vs -0.26), 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 DGZ and ASHS
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