DGZ vs. LENS

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

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 -11.14% vs 38.34% for LENS. At a correlation of -0.36, they often move in opposite directions. DGZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.

Performance

DGZ vs. LENS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGZ achieves a 7.37% return, which is significantly higher than LENS's 1.89% return.

DGZ

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 6.28%
• 6M: 12.88%
• YTD: 7.37%
• 1Y: -11.14%
• 3Y*: -15.55%
• 5Y*: -9.77%
• 10Y*: -7.63%

LENS

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -5.91%
• 6M: -7.67%
• YTD: 1.89%
• 1Y: 38.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DGZ vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes	7.37%	-30.11%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.89%	56.41%

Correlation

The correlation between DGZ and LENS is -0.33, 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	-0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2025	-0.36

Return for Risk

DGZ vs. LENS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DGZ

DGZ Risk / Return Rank: 8
DGZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
DGZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
DGZ Omega Ratio Rank: 11
DGZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
DGZ Martin Ratio Rank: 7

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 43
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 50
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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. 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.

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	LENS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.16	1.38	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.27	1.77	-1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.26	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.31	1.57	-1.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.55	4.22	-4.77

DGZ vs. LENS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.16, which is lower than the LENS Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGZ and LENS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

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 -24.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGZ and LENS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DGZ	LENS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-86.32%	-24.55%	-61.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.14%	-24.55%	-11.59%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-81.61%	-22.35%	-59.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-57.86%	-4.91%	-52.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.16%	9.11%	+11.05%

Volatility

DGZ vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison

DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a higher volatility of 24.11% compared to Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) at 6.71%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	DGZ	LENS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	24.11%	6.71%	+17.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	58.97%	22.55%	+36.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	70.25%	27.89%	+42.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.88%	25.70%	+11.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.40%	25.70%	+2.70%

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 1.57%.

Position	TTM	2025
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes	0.00%	0.00%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.57%	1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DGZ and LENS in my portfolio?

DGZ and LENS have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DGZ or LENS?

DGZ has higher volatility (24.11%) compared to LENS (6.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGZ dropped -86.32% vs LENS's -24.55%.

Which ETF is better, DGZ or LENS?

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 38.34% vs -11.14% for DGZ. On fees, DGZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, LENS has been the lower-risk option at 6.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DGZ or LENS?

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 38.34% return vs -11.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DGZ or LENS?

DGZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DGZ or LENS?

LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 0.00% for DGZ.

What is the main difference between DGZ and LENS?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LENS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs -0.16), 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.