DMAD.L vs. GDX.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

DMAD.L (Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and GDX.L (VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - DMAD.L is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Disruptive Materials V2 Index, while GDX.L is a Precious Metals Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DMAD.L returned 11.13%/yr vs 29.57%/yr for GDX.L. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DMAD.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for GDX.L.

Performance

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

DMAD.L is traded in GBP, while GDX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the GDX.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DMAD.L achieves a -5.68% return, which is significantly higher than GDX.L's -16.97% return.

DMAD.L

• 1D: -2.20%
• 1M: -19.96%
• 6M: -16.91%
• YTD: -5.68%
• 1Y: 48.12%
• 3Y*: 11.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GDX.L

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: -21.16%
• 6M: -26.63%
• YTD: -16.97%
• 1Y: 40.90%
• 3Y*: 29.57%
• 5Y*: 17.81%
• 10Y*: 9.80%

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

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DMAD.L Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-5.68%	83.26%	-5.93%	-23.95%	-12.91%
GDX.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-16.97%	138.39%	11.13%	4.21%	11.98%

Correlation

The correlation between DMAD.L and GDX.L is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2022	0.52

Over the past year, DMAD.L and GDX.L have become more correlated (0.73) than their long-term average of 0.52, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

DMAD.L

DMAD.L Risk / Return Rank: 47
DMAD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
DMAD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
DMAD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 47
DMAD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
DMAD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 40

GDX.L

GDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
GDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
GDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
GDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 31
GDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
GDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L) and VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GDX.L). 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.

	DMAD.L	GDX.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	0.89	+0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	1.39	+0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.17	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	1.08	+0.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.76	2.59	+2.17

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DMAD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is higher than the GDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DMAD.L and GDX.L, 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

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DMAD.L drawdown since its inception was -47.80%, which is greater than GDX.L's maximum drawdown of -44.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DMAD.L and GDX.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	DMAD.L	GDX.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.80%	-44.50%	-3.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.37%	-37.80%	+9.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.78%	-37.80%	+3.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-37.80%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.37%	-37.80%	+9.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.26%	-21.21%	-3.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.09%	15.74%	-5.65%

Volatility

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L) is 9.69%, while VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GDX.L) has a volatility of 13.23%. This indicates that DMAD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DMAD.L	GDX.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.69%	13.23%	-3.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.97%	37.70%	-9.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.57%	46.07%	-11.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.20%	34.53%	-5.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.20%	33.58%	-4.38%

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

DMAD.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GDX.L's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

DMAD.L vs. GDX.L - Dividend Comparison

DMAD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, while GDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
DMAD.L Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	0.90%	0.74%	2.38%	1.32%
GDX.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DMAD.L and GDX.L in my portfolio?

DMAD.L and GDX.L have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, DMAD.L or GDX.L?

On fees, DMAD.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DMAD.L or GDX.L?

DMAD.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for GDX.L.

What is the main difference between DMAD.L and GDX.L?

DMAD.L is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while GDX.L is Precious Metals Equities. DMAD.L tracks Solactive Disruptive Materials V2 Index, while GDX.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for DMAD.L and 0.53% for GDX.L.