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

Performance

DGZ vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). 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 13.79% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's -4.72% return.


DGZ

1D
4.60%
1M
27.91%
YTD
13.79%
6M
21.33%
1Y
-7.69%
3Y*
-14.24%
5Y*
-9.28%
10Y*
-7.12%

GLDM

1D
-1.91%
1M
-8.82%
YTD
-4.72%
6M
-8.62%
1Y
21.66%
3Y*
28.79%
5Y*
18.18%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DGZ vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
DGZ
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes
13.79%-32.55%-16.46%-4.75%4.93%1.53%-20.80%-13.42%0.48%
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
-4.72%64.20%27.08%13.04%-0.47%-4.01%25.10%18.10%1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between DGZ and GLDM 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 Jun 26, 2018

-0.66

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between DGZ and GLDM has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.66 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. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

DGZ
DGZ Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
DGZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGZ Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
DGZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGZ Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank

GLDM
GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
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. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


DGZGLDMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.91

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.17

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.20

0.89

-1.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.35

2.40

-2.75

DGZ vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.11, which is lower than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGZ and GLDM, 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...

Drawdowns

DGZ vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGZ drawdown since its inception was -86.32%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -24.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and GLDM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DGZGLDMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.32%

-24.35%

-61.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-38.32%

-24.35%

-13.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-59.54%

-24.35%

-35.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.54%

-24.35%

-37.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-80.51%

-23.82%

-56.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-57.80%

-6.32%

-51.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

22.24%

9.05%

+13.19%

Volatility

DGZ vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 45.91% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 8.16%. This indicates that DGZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DGZGLDMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

45.91%

8.16%

+37.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

58.66%

24.22%

+34.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

69.62%

27.36%

+42.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.50%

18.15%

+18.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.17%

17.02%

+11.15%

DGZ vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

DGZ vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

Neither DGZ nor GLDM has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


DGZ and GLDM 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 (45.91%) compared to GLDM (8.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs GLDM's -24.35%.

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 18.18% vs -9.28% for DGZ. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GLDM has been the lower-risk option at 8.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 18.18% return vs -9.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.

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

DGZ is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while GLDM is Gold. DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%), while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGZ and 0.10% for GLDM.

GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 vs -0.11), 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 GLDM

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