DZZ vs. GLL
DZZ (DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes) and GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) are both Leveraged Commodities funds - DZZ tracks the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Gold (-200%) while GLL tracks the Bloomberg Gold (-200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, DZZ returned -9.09%/yr vs -20.49%/yr for GLL. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. DZZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for GLL.
Performance
DZZ vs. GLL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DZZ achieves a -50.53% return, which is significantly lower than GLL's 1.34% return. Over the past 10 years, DZZ has outperformed GLL with an annualized return of -9.09%, while GLL has yielded a comparatively lower -20.49% annualized return.
DZZ
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- -7.58%
- 6M
- -52.15%
- YTD
- -50.53%
- 1Y
- 6.12%
- 3Y*
- -9.06%
- 5Y*
- -6.95%
- 10Y*
- -9.09%
- ALL TIME*
- -13.05%
GLL
- 1D
- 3.15%
- 1M
- 3.39%
- 6M
- 33.97%
- YTD
- 1.34%
- 1Y
- -39.14%
- 3Y*
- -38.51%
- 5Y*
- -27.47%
- 10Y*
- -20.49%
- ALL TIME*
- -21.77%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $5.88K | $5.95K | $21.77K | |
| $38.26M | $37.47M | $59.93M |
DZZ vs. GLL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DZZ DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes | -50.53% | 132.78% | -35.06% | -8.14% | 2.79% | 0.56% | -37.13% | -26.64% | 8.21% | -21.81% |
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 1.34% | -62.81% | -33.33% | -14.91% | -2.12% | 1.66% | -41.47% | -26.95% | 5.39% | -23.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between DZZ and GLL is 0.41, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.41 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.57 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2008 | 0.81 |
Over the past year, the correlation between DZZ and GLL has dropped to 0.41 - well below their long-term average of 0.81, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
DZZ vs. GLL — Risk / Return Rank
DZZ
GLL
DZZ vs. GLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes (DZZ) and ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL). 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.
| DZZ | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 0.88 | +0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.02 | -0.65 | +0.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.03 | -0.94 | +0.97 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DZZ vs. GLL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DZZ drawdown since its inception was -96.64%, roughly equal to the maximum GLL drawdown of -99.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DZZ and GLL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DZZ | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.64% | -99.24% | +2.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -81.05% | -64.23% | -16.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -81.05% | -87.95% | +6.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -81.05% | -89.76% | +8.71% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -81.05% | -95.76% | +14.71% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -95.37% | -98.74% | +3.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -82.40% | -85.23% | +2.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 61.82% | 44.60% | +17.22% |
Volatility
DZZ vs. GLL - Volatility Comparison
DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes (DZZ) has a higher volatility of 14.44% compared to ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) at 12.63%. This indicates that DZZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DZZ | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.44% | 12.63% | +1.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 52.18% | 45.01% | +7.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 170.05% | 55.39% | +114.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 84.19% | 36.88% | +47.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 64.26% | 32.48% | +31.78% |
DZZ vs. GLL - Expense Ratio Comparison
DZZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than GLL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
DZZ vs. GLL - Dividend Comparison
Neither DZZ nor GLL has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
DZZ and GLL have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DZZ has higher volatility (14.44%) compared to GLL (12.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DZZ dropped -96.64% vs GLL's -99.24%.
On 10-year performance, DZZ leads with -9.09% vs -20.49% for GLL. On fees, DZZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, GLL has been the lower-risk option at 12.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, DZZ has performed better with a -9.09% return vs -20.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DZZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.
DZZ and GLL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
DZZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Gold (-200%), while GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%). They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DZZ and 0.95% for GLL.
DZZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.01 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 DZZ and GLL
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