PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DGZ vs. BAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DGZ vs. BAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGZ achieves a -2.01% return, which is significantly lower than BAR's 4.00% return.


DGZ

1D
1.49%
1M
7.99%
YTD
-2.01%
6M
-0.71%
1Y
-18.73%
3Y*
-17.92%
5Y*
-11.08%
10Y*
-9.10%

BAR

1D
0.20%
1M
-2.64%
YTD
4.00%
6M
6.51%
1Y
32.54%
3Y*
31.82%
5Y*
18.92%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DGZ vs. BAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DGZ
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes
-2.01%-32.55%-16.46%-4.75%4.93%1.53%-20.80%-13.42%4.88%1.65%
BAR
GraniteShares Gold Trust
4.00%64.12%26.97%12.96%-0.55%-3.92%25.02%18.16%-1.87%-1.15%

Correlation

The correlation between DGZ and BAR is -0.40, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.40

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.45

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 1, 2017

-0.67

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between DGZ and BAR has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.67 to -0.40, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.

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. BAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

DGZ
DGZ Risk / Return Rank: 66
Overall Rank
DGZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGZ Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
DGZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGZ Martin Ratio Rank: 44
Martin Ratio Rank

BAR
BAR Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
BAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAR Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
BAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAR Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

DGZ vs. BAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR). 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.


DGZBARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.28

1.24

-1.52

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.01

1.63

-1.63

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.00

1.25

-0.25

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.51

1.87

-2.39

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-0.90

4.71

-5.61

DGZ vs. BAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.28, which is lower than the BAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGZ and BAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DGZBARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.28

1.24

-1.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.32

1.06

-1.38

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.32

0.91

-1.23

Drawdowns

DGZ vs. BAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGZ drawdown since its inception was -86.32%, which is greater than BAR's maximum drawdown of -21.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and BAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DGZBARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.32%

-21.53%

-64.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-38.32%

-19.19%

-19.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-59.54%

-19.19%

-40.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.54%

-20.91%

-40.63%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-83.21%

-16.87%

-66.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-57.73%

-6.44%

-51.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

21.76%

7.64%

+14.12%

Volatility

DGZ vs. BAR - Volatility Comparison

DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 44.94% compared to GraniteShares Gold Trust (BAR) at 5.74%. This indicates that DGZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DGZBARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

44.94%

5.74%

+39.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

54.77%

23.01%

+31.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

66.21%

26.52%

+39.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

35.18%

17.92%

+17.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.37%

16.38%

+10.99%

DGZ vs. BAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BAR's 0.17% expense ratio.


Dividends

DGZ vs. BAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither DGZ nor BAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


DGZ and BAR 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.

DGZ has higher volatility (44.94%) compared to BAR (5.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs BAR's -21.53%.

On 5-year performance, BAR leads with 18.92% vs -11.08% for DGZ. On fees, BAR is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BAR has been the lower-risk option at 5.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, BAR has performed better with a 18.92% return vs -11.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BAR is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.

DGZ and BAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

DGZ is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while BAR is Gold. DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%), while BAR tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt). They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGZ and 0.17% for BAR.

BAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs -0.28), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DGZ and BAR

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