DGZ vs. GLTR
DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) and GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares 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 GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, DGZ returned -8.53%/yr vs 10.90%/yr for GLTR. Their -0.72 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. DGZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.
Performance
DGZ vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DGZ achieves a -2.82% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's -6.71% return. Over the past 10 years, DGZ has underperformed GLTR with an annualized return of -8.53%, while GLTR has yielded a comparatively higher 10.90% 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%
GLTR
- 1D
- 3.97%
- 1M
- 1.66%
- 6M
- -20.31%
- YTD
- -6.71%
- 1Y
- 34.83%
- 3Y*
- 29.44%
- 5Y*
- 15.57%
- 10Y*
- 10.90%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.06%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $26.88K | $31.34K | $38.49K | |
| $15.91M | $12.81M | $13.67M |
DGZ vs. GLTR - 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% |
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF | -6.71% | 87.25% | 20.63% | 2.01% | -0.25% | -9.60% | 29.52% | 20.96% | -2.85% | 12.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between DGZ and GLTR is -0.28, 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. | -0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.37 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | -0.50 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | -0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2010 | -0.72 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between DGZ and GLTR has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.72 to -0.28, 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. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank
DGZ
GLTR
DGZ vs. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). 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 | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.19 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.53 | 0.92 | -1.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.92 | 1.82 | -2.74 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DGZ vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DGZ drawdown since its inception was -86.32%, which is greater than GLTR's maximum drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and GLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DGZ | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.32% | -55.70% | -30.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.14% | -37.87% | +1.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -59.54% | -37.87% | -21.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.54% | -37.87% | -23.67% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -71.49% | -37.87% | -33.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -83.35% | -32.75% | -50.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -57.95% | -28.88% | -29.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 20.66% | 19.21% | +1.45% |
Volatility
DGZ vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 24.24% compared to abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) at 8.43%. This indicates that DGZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DGZ | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 24.24% | 8.43% | +15.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 60.86% | 27.73% | +33.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 73.43% | 39.70% | +33.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 38.19% | 24.26% | +13.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.22% | 20.84% | +8.38% |
DGZ vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
DGZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
DGZ vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison
Neither DGZ nor GLTR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
DGZ and GLTR have a correlation of -0.28, 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 GLTR (8.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs GLTR's -55.70%.
On 10-year performance, GLTR leads with 10.90% vs -8.53% for DGZ. On fees, GLTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 8.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GLTR has performed better with a 10.90% return vs -8.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.
DGZ and GLTR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
DGZ is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while GLTR is Precious Metals. DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%), while GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGZ and 0.60% for GLTR.
GLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 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 GLTR
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