DGZ vs. EASG
DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) and EASG (Xtrackers MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Equity 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 EASG is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DGZ returned -10.05%/yr vs 6.85%/yr for EASG. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. DGZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for EASG.
Performance
DGZ vs. EASG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DGZ achieves a 2.71% return, which is significantly lower than EASG's 8.44% return.
DGZ
- 1D
- 4.82%
- 1M
- 16.59%
- YTD
- 2.71%
- 6M
- 4.61%
- 1Y
- -15.32%
- 3Y*
- -16.62%
- 5Y*
- -10.05%
- 10Y*
- -8.68%
EASG
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- 4.33%
- YTD
- 8.44%
- 6M
- 10.51%
- 1Y
- 19.62%
- 3Y*
- 13.77%
- 5Y*
- 6.85%
- 10Y*
- —
DGZ vs. EASG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 2.71% | -32.55% | -16.46% | -4.75% | 4.93% | 1.53% | -20.80% | -13.42% | -3.22% |
EASG Xtrackers MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Equity ETF | 8.44% | 25.19% | 2.26% | 18.80% | -16.94% | 11.36% | 10.73% | 23.66% | -5.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between DGZ and EASG is -0.14, 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 | -0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.13 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2018 | -0.12 |
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. EASG — Risk / Return Rank
DGZ
EASG
DGZ vs. EASG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and Xtrackers MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Equity ETF (EASG). 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.
| DGZ | EASG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.50 | ||
| 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 | -0.40 | 1.68 | -2.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.70 | 6.20 | -6.90 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| DGZ | EASG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.23 | 1.27 | -1.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.29 | 0.41 | -0.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.31 | 0.51 | -0.83 |
Drawdowns
DGZ vs. EASG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DGZ drawdown since its inception was -86.32%, which is greater than EASG's maximum drawdown of -32.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and EASG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DGZ | EASG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.32% | -32.06% | -54.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.32% | -11.74% | -26.58% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -59.54% | -16.14% | -43.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.54% | -31.42% | -30.12% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -71.49% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -82.41% | -0.60% | -81.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -57.74% | -6.19% | -51.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.80% | 3.17% | +18.63% |
Volatility
DGZ vs. EASG - Volatility Comparison
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 45.00% compared to Xtrackers MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Equity ETF (EASG) at 4.83%. This indicates that DGZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EASG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DGZ | EASG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 45.00% | 4.83% | +40.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 54.96% | 12.54% | +42.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 66.38% | 15.55% | +50.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.24% | 16.64% | +18.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.40% | 18.35% | +9.05% |
DGZ vs. EASG - Expense Ratio Comparison
DGZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EASG's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
DGZ vs. EASG - Dividend Comparison
DGZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EASG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
EASG Xtrackers MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Equity ETF | 3.86% | 4.18% | 2.93% | 2.51% | 2.47% | 2.69% | 1.70% | 2.94% | 0.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DGZ and EASG have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DGZ has higher volatility (45.00%) compared to EASG (4.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs EASG's -32.06%.
On 5-year performance, EASG leads with 6.85% vs -10.05% for DGZ. On fees, EASG is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, EASG has been the lower-risk option at 4.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EASG has performed better with a 6.85% return vs -10.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EASG is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.
EASG has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 0.00% for DGZ.
DGZ is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while EASG is Foreign Large Cap Equities. DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%), while EASG tracks MSCI EAFE ESG Leaders Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGZ and 0.14% for EASG.
EASG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs -0.23), 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 EASG
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