DULL vs. GLTR
DULL (MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DULL is a Inverse Commodities fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt) (-300%), while GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DULL returned -58.83%/yr vs 27.11%/yr for GLTR. Their -0.92 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. DULL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.
Performance
DULL vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with DULL having a -12.17% return and GLTR slightly higher at -11.65%.
DULL
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 3.76%
- 6M
- 20.95%
- YTD
- -12.17%
- 1Y
- -61.47%
- 3Y*
- -58.83%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -56.11%
GLTR
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -2.49%
- 6M
- -19.22%
- YTD
- -11.65%
- 1Y
- 29.01%
- 3Y*
- 27.11%
- 5Y*
- 13.64%
- 10Y*
- 10.29%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.70%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $408.60K | $774.21K | $681.81K | |
| $16.13M | $13.13M | $13.77M |
DULL vs. GLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DULL MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN | -12.17% | -80.59% | -51.68% | -28.84% |
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF | -11.65% | 87.25% | 20.63% | 6.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between DULL and GLTR is -0.92, 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. | -0.92 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2023 | -0.92 |
The correlation between DULL and GLTR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.92 to -0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
DULL vs. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank
DULL
GLTR
DULL vs. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (DULL) 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.
| DULL | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.48 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.87 | 1.17 | -0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.76 | 0.77 | -1.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.02 | 1.53 | -2.55 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DULL vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DULL drawdown since its inception was -97.12%, which is greater than GLTR's maximum drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DULL and GLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DULL | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.12% | -55.70% | -41.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -81.20% | -37.87% | -43.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -97.12% | -37.87% | -59.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -37.87% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -37.87% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.33% | -36.32% | -58.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -60.91% | -28.88% | -32.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 60.53% | 18.97% | +41.56% |
Volatility
DULL vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (DULL) has a higher volatility of 17.41% compared to abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) at 7.57%. This indicates that DULL'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
| DULL | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 17.41% | 7.57% | +9.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 62.40% | 28.26% | +34.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 82.72% | 39.57% | +43.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 59.09% | 24.19% | +34.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 59.09% | 20.81% | +38.28% |
DULL vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
DULL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
DULL vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison
Neither DULL nor GLTR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
DULL and GLTR have a correlation of -0.92, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DULL has higher volatility (17.41%) compared to GLTR (7.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DULL dropped -97.12% vs GLTR's -55.70%.
On 3-year performance, GLTR leads with 27.11% vs -58.83% for DULL. On fees, GLTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 7.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GLTR has performed better with a 27.11% return vs -58.83%. 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 0.95% for DULL.
DULL and GLTR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
DULL is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while GLTR is Precious Metals. DULL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt) (-300%), while GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. They also come from different issuers: REX and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for DULL and 0.60% for GLTR.
GLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.74 vs -0.75), 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 DULL 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