DGZ vs. LENS
DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) and LENS (Sarmaya Thematic 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 LENS is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Sarmaya Partners. DGZ is passively managed, while LENS is actively managed. Over the past year, DGZ returned -18.73% vs 64.37% for LENS. At a correlation of -0.40, they often move in opposite directions. DGZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.
Performance
DGZ vs. LENS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DGZ achieves a -2.01% return, which is significantly lower than LENS's 15.10% 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%
LENS
- 1D
- 0.91%
- 1M
- -0.94%
- YTD
- 15.10%
- 6M
- 21.08%
- 1Y
- 64.37%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DGZ vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | -2.01% | -31.19% |
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF | 15.10% | 56.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between DGZ and LENS is -0.35, 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 | -0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025 | -0.40 |
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. LENS — Risk / Return Rank
DGZ
LENS
DGZ vs. LENS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). 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 | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.28 | 2.44 | -2.73 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.01 | 2.79 | -2.79 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.43 | -0.42 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.51 | 4.46 | -4.97 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.90 | 11.27 | -12.17 |
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 | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.28 | 2.44 | -2.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.32 | — | — |
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 | 2.17 | -2.50 |
Drawdowns
DGZ vs. LENS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DGZ drawdown since its inception was -86.32%, which is greater than LENS's maximum drawdown of -15.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and LENS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DGZ | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.32% | -15.47% | -70.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.32% | -15.47% | -22.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -59.54% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.54% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -71.49% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -83.21% | -12.28% | -70.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -57.73% | -3.68% | -54.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.76% | 6.13% | +15.63% |
Volatility
DGZ vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 44.94% compared to Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) at 6.02%. This indicates that DGZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LENS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DGZ | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 44.94% | 6.02% | +38.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 54.77% | 22.01% | +32.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 66.21% | 26.61% | +39.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.18% | 25.48% | +9.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.37% | 25.48% | +1.89% |
DGZ vs. LENS - Expense Ratio Comparison
DGZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than LENS's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
DGZ vs. LENS - Dividend Comparison
DGZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF | 1.39% | 1.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DGZ and LENS have a correlation of -0.35, 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 LENS (6.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs LENS's -15.47%.
On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 64.37% vs -18.73% for DGZ. On fees, DGZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, LENS has been the lower-risk option at 6.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 64.37% return vs -18.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DGZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.
LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 0.00% for DGZ.
DGZ is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while LENS is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and Sarmaya Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DGZ and 0.79% for LENS.
LENS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 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.
Find the right allocation for DGZ and LENS
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