EDGH vs. DGZ
EDGH (3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF) and DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) are both exchange-traded funds - EDGH is a Commodities fund actively managed by 3EDGE Asset Management, while DGZ is a Inverse Commodities fund tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). EDGH is actively managed, while DGZ is passively managed. Over the past year, EDGH returned 31.24% vs -15.32% for DGZ. At a correlation of -0.44, they often move in opposite directions. EDGH charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DGZ.
Performance
EDGH vs. DGZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDGH achieves a 12.49% return, which is significantly higher than DGZ's 2.71% return.
EDGH
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- -1.84%
- YTD
- 12.49%
- 6M
- 14.30%
- 1Y
- 31.24%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DGZ
- 1D
- 4.82%
- 1M
- 16.59%
- YTD
- 2.71%
- 6M
- 4.61%
- 1Y
- -15.32%
- 3Y*
- -16.62%
- 5Y*
- -10.05%
- 10Y*
- -8.68%
EDGH vs. DGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF | 12.49% | 28.98% | -1.99% |
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 2.71% | -32.55% | -1.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDGH and DGZ is -0.42, 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 | -0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024 | -0.44 |
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
EDGH vs. DGZ — Risk / Return Rank
EDGH
DGZ
EDGH vs. DGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) and DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ). 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.
| EDGH | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.01 | +0.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.96 | -0.40 | +3.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.70 | -0.70 | +10.40 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EDGH | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.77 | -0.23 | +2.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.29 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.32 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.53 | -0.31 | +1.84 |
Drawdowns
EDGH vs. DGZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDGH drawdown since its inception was -10.60%, smaller than the maximum DGZ drawdown of -86.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDGH and DGZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDGH | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.60% | -86.32% | +75.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.60% | -38.32% | +27.72% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -59.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -61.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -71.49% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.80% | -82.41% | +77.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.04% | -57.74% | +55.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.23% | 21.80% | -18.57% |
Volatility
EDGH vs. DGZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) is 3.01%, while DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a volatility of 45.00%. This indicates that EDGH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DGZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EDGH | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.01% | 45.00% | -41.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.72% | 54.96% | -40.24% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.72% | 66.38% | -48.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.60% | 35.24% | -19.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.60% | 27.40% | -11.80% |
EDGH vs. DGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDGH has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than DGZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDGH vs. DGZ - Dividend Comparison
EDGH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, while DGZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF | 1.05% | 1.18% | 3.19% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EDGH and DGZ have a correlation of -0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DGZ has higher volatility (45.00%) compared to EDGH (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDGH dropped -10.60% vs DGZ's -86.32%.
On 1-year performance, EDGH leads with 31.24% vs -15.32% for DGZ. On fees, DGZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, EDGH has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EDGH has performed better with a 31.24% return vs -15.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DGZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for EDGH.
EDGH has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 0.00% for DGZ.
EDGH is categorized as Commodities, while DGZ is Inverse Commodities. They also come from different issuers: 3EDGE Asset Management and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for EDGH and 0.75% for DGZ.
EDGH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs -0.23), 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 EDGH and DGZ
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