DMAD.L vs. GIGB.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

DMAD.L (Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and GIGB.L (VanEck S&P Global Mining 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 GIGB.L is a Mining Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Mining Reduced Coal Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DMAD.L returned 11.13%/yr vs 18.86%/yr for GIGB.L. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

DMAD.L vs. GIGB.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 S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GIGB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DMAD.L achieves a -5.68% return, which is significantly lower than GIGB.L's -2.57% return.

DMAD.L

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

GIGB.L

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: -18.03%
• 6M: -13.67%
• YTD: -2.57%
• 1Y: 48.15%
• 3Y*: 18.86%
• 5Y*: 12.75%
• 10Y*: —

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

DMAD.L vs. GIGB.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%
GIGB.L VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-2.57%	77.74%	-7.37%	-1.37%	10.89%

Correlation

The correlation between DMAD.L and GIGB.L is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2022	0.78

The correlation between DMAD.L and GIGB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DMAD.L vs. GIGB.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

GIGB.L

GIGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 48
GIGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
GIGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
GIGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 49
GIGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GIGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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. GIGB.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 S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GIGB.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	GIGB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	1.41	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	1.92	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.24	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	1.81	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.76	4.84	-0.09

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

The current DMAD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is comparable to the GIGB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DMAD.L and GIGB.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. GIGB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DMAD.L drawdown since its inception was -47.80%, which is greater than GIGB.L's maximum drawdown of -45.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DMAD.L and GIGB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	DMAD.L	GIGB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.80%	-45.07%	-2.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.37%	-26.52%	-1.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.78%	-26.52%	-8.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.37%	-26.32%	-2.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.26%	-14.83%	-9.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.09%	9.91%	+0.18%

Volatility

DMAD.L vs. GIGB.L - Volatility Comparison

Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L) and VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GIGB.L) have volatilities of 9.69% and 10.11%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DMAD.L	GIGB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.69%	10.11%	-0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.97%	28.40%	-0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.57%	33.92%	+0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.20%	29.68%	-0.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.20%	29.36%	-0.16%

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

Both DMAD.L and GIGB.L have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

DMAD.L vs. GIGB.L - Dividend Comparison

DMAD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, while GIGB.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%
GIGB.L VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

DMAD.L and GIGB.L have a correlation of 0.85, 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 GIGB.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

DMAD.L and GIGB.L have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

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

DMAD.L is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while GIGB.L is Mining Equities. DMAD.L tracks Solactive Disruptive Materials V2 Index, while GIGB.L tracks S&P Global Mining Reduced Coal Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and VanEck.