GCAL vs. NUG
GCAL (Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF) and NUG (Leverage Shares 2X Long NU Daily ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GCAL is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while NUG is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Leverage Shares. Both are actively managed. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GCAL charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for NUG.
Performance
GCAL vs. NUG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GCAL achieves a 1.66% return, which is significantly higher than NUG's -55.68% return.
GCAL
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 1.66%
- 6M
- 2.26%
- 1Y
- 7.03%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NUG
- 1D
- -16.68%
- 1M
- -34.22%
- YTD
- -55.68%
- 6M
- -60.73%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GCAL vs. NUG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF | 1.66% | 0.59% |
NUG Leverage Shares 2X Long NU Daily ETF | -55.68% | 11.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between GCAL and NUG is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2025 | 0.10 |
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
GCAL vs. NUG — Risk / Return Rank
GCAL
NUG
GCAL vs. NUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF (GCAL) and Leverage Shares 2X Long NU Daily ETF (NUG). 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.
| GCAL | NUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.90 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.17 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.61 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.04 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.04 | — | — |
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
| GCAL | NUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.90 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.19 | -0.91 | +2.10 |
Drawdowns
GCAL vs. NUG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GCAL drawdown since its inception was -4.39%, smaller than the maximum NUG drawdown of -64.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCAL and NUG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GCAL | NUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.39% | -64.15% | +59.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.24% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.25% | -64.15% | +63.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.87% | -28.99% | +28.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.62% | — | — |
Volatility
GCAL vs. NUG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GCAL | NUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.73% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.76% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.45% | 80.48% | -78.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 80.48% | -76.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.63% | 80.48% | -76.85% |
GCAL vs. NUG - Expense Ratio Comparison
GCAL has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than NUG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GCAL vs. NUG - Dividend Comparison
GCAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, while NUG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GCAL Goldman Sachs Dynamic California Municipal Income ETF | 3.32% | 3.06% | 1.41% |
NUG Leverage Shares 2X Long NU Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GCAL and NUG have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GCAL is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GCAL is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for NUG.
GCAL has the higher dividend yield at 3.32%, compared with 0.00% for NUG.
GCAL is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while NUG is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Leverage Shares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for GCAL and 0.75% for NUG.
Find the right allocation for GCAL and NUG
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