DZZ vs. LENS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DZZ (DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes) and LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DZZ is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index-Optimum Yield Gold (-200%), while LENS is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Sarmaya Partners. DZZ is passively managed, while LENS is actively managed. Over the past year, DZZ returned 11.20% vs 61.82% for LENS. At a correlation of -0.42, they often move in opposite directions. DZZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.

Performance

DZZ vs. LENS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes (DZZ) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DZZ achieves a -48.31% return, which is significantly lower than LENS's 13.33% return.

DZZ

• 1D: 1.45%
• 1M: -16.65%
• YTD: -48.31%
• 6M: -41.62%
• 1Y: 11.20%
• 3Y*: -6.90%
• 5Y*: -4.82%
• 10Y*: -10.52%

LENS

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 13.33%
• 6M: 18.33%
• 1Y: 61.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DZZ vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DZZ DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes	-48.31%	137.04%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	13.33%	56.21%

Correlation

The correlation between DZZ and LENS is -0.46, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	-0.42

Return for Risk

DZZ vs. LENS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DZZ

DZZ Risk / Return Rank: 19
DZZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
DZZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
DZZ Omega Ratio Rank: 33
DZZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
DZZ Martin Ratio Rank: 10

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 67
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 68
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

DZZ vs. LENS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes (DZZ) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). 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.

	DZZ	LENS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.07	2.34	-2.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.69	2.70	-1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.41	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.14	4.02	-3.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.21	10.02	-9.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DZZ vs. LENS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DZZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.07, which is lower than the LENS Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DZZ and LENS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DZZ	LENS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07	2.34	-2.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.06	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.16	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.23	2.09	-2.33

Drawdowns

DZZ vs. LENS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DZZ drawdown since its inception was -96.64%, which is greater than LENS's maximum drawdown of -15.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DZZ and LENS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DZZ	LENS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.64%	-15.47%	-81.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-80.84%	-15.47%	-65.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-80.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-80.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-80.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.16%	-13.64%	-81.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-82.30%	-3.71%	-78.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	53.19%	6.19%	+47.00%

Volatility

DZZ vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison

DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes (DZZ) has a higher volatility of 30.21% compared to Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) at 6.16%. This indicates that DZZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LENS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DZZ	LENS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	30.21%	6.16%	+24.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	59.65%	22.07%	+37.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	169.45%	26.54%	+142.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	83.63%	25.49%	+58.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	64.05%	25.49%	+38.56%

DZZ vs. LENS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DZZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than LENS's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

DZZ vs. LENS - Dividend Comparison

DZZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%.

Position	TTM	2025
DZZ DB Gold Double Short Exchange Traded Notes	0.00%	0.00%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.41%	1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DZZ and LENS in my portfolio?

DZZ and LENS have a correlation of -0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DZZ or LENS?

DZZ has higher volatility (30.21%) compared to LENS (6.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DZZ dropped -96.64% vs LENS's -15.47%.

Which ETF is better, DZZ or LENS?

On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 61.82% vs 11.20% for DZZ. On fees, DZZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, LENS has been the lower-risk option at 6.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DZZ or LENS?

Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 61.82% return vs 11.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DZZ or LENS?

DZZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DZZ or LENS?

LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.00% for DZZ.

What is the main difference between DZZ and LENS?

DZZ is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while LENS is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and Sarmaya Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for DZZ and 0.79% for LENS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LENS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 0.07), 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.