DULL vs. RING
DULL (MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) and RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DULL is a Inverse Commodities fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt) (-300%), while RING is a Gold fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DULL returned -58.74%/yr vs 44.21%/yr for RING. Their -0.79 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. DULL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RING.
Performance
DULL vs. RING - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DULL achieves a -12.16% return, which is significantly lower than RING's -10.21% return.
DULL
- 1D
- 4.27%
- 1M
- 3.77%
- 6M
- 35.38%
- YTD
- -12.16%
- 1Y
- -61.47%
- 3Y*
- -58.74%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -56.20%
RING
- 1D
- 2.90%
- 1M
- -2.34%
- 6M
- -18.20%
- YTD
- -10.21%
- 1Y
- 49.46%
- 3Y*
- 44.21%
- 5Y*
- 20.09%
- 10Y*
- 11.47%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.00%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $435.85K | $839.62K | $687.64K | |
| $77.82M | $51.45M | $44.34M |
DULL vs. RING - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DULL MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN | -12.16% | -80.59% | -51.68% | -28.84% |
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | -10.21% | 164.72% | 15.98% | 14.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between DULL and RING is -0.81, 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. | -0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2023 | -0.79 |
The correlation between DULL and RING has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.81 to -0.79 - 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. RING — Risk / Return Rank
DULL
RING
DULL vs. RING - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (DULL) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING). 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 | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.79 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.86 | 1.20 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | 1.29 | -2.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.06 | 2.80 | -3.86 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DULL vs. RING - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DULL drawdown since its inception was -97.12%, which is greater than RING's maximum drawdown of -79.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DULL and RING.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DULL | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.12% | -79.47% | -17.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -81.20% | -38.61% | -42.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -97.12% | -38.61% | -58.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -47.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -52.04% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.33% | -33.49% | -60.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -60.87% | -47.23% | -13.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 61.14% | 17.70% | +43.44% |
Volatility
DULL vs. RING - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (DULL) has a higher volatility of 18.63% compared to iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) at 11.87%. This indicates that DULL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RING based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DULL | RING | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 18.63% | 11.87% | +6.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 67.73% | 37.14% | +30.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 82.78% | 48.83% | +33.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 59.13% | 37.30% | +21.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 59.13% | 36.67% | +22.46% |
DULL vs. RING - Expense Ratio Comparison
DULL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than RING's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
DULL vs. RING - Dividend Comparison
DULL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DULL MicroSectors Gold -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | 1.38% | 0.84% | 1.43% | 2.01% | 2.29% | 2.38% | 0.83% | 0.83% | 0.70% | 0.42% | 1.41% | 0.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DULL and RING have a correlation of -0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DULL has higher volatility (18.63%) compared to RING (11.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DULL dropped -97.12% vs RING's -79.47%.
On 3-year performance, RING leads with 44.21% vs -58.74% for DULL. On fees, RING is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RING has been the lower-risk option at 11.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, RING has performed better with a 44.21% return vs -58.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RING is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for DULL.
RING has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.00% for DULL.
DULL is categorized as Inverse Commodities, while RING is Gold. DULL tracks LBMA Gold Price PM ($/ozt) (-300%), while RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: REX and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for DULL and 0.39% for RING.
RING currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs -0.77), 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 RING
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