GDX.L vs. DMAD.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

GDX.L (VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and DMAD.L (Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - GDX.L is a Precious Metals Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index, while DMAD.L is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Disruptive Materials V2 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GDX.L returned 30.94%/yr vs 12.29%/yr for DMAD.L. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GDX.L charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for DMAD.L.

Performance

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GDX.L) and Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

GDX.L is traded in USD, while DMAD.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the DMAD.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDX.L achieves a -17.08% return, which is significantly lower than DMAD.L's -5.73% return.

GDX.L

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -20.18%
• 6M: -26.20%
• YTD: -17.08%
• 1Y: 41.29%
• 3Y*: 30.94%
• 5Y*: 17.28%
• 10Y*: 10.09%

DMAD.L

• 1D: -2.40%
• 1M: -19.00%
• 6M: -16.47%
• YTD: -5.73%
• 1Y: 48.49%
• 3Y*: 12.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GDX.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-17.08%	156.68%	9.22%	9.69%	16.52%
DMAD.L Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-5.73%	97.09%	-7.49%	-19.94%	-8.95%

Correlation

The correlation between GDX.L and DMAD.L is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2022	0.59

The correlation between GDX.L and DMAD.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (all time) to 0.74 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDX.L

GDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 30
GDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
GDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
GDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 31
GDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
GDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 26

DMAD.L

DMAD.L Risk / Return Rank: 47
DMAD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
DMAD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
DMAD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 47
DMAD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
DMAD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GDX.L) and Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L). 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.

	GDX.L	DMAD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.87	1.33	-0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.38	1.82	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.23	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.08	1.69	-0.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.55	4.59	-2.04

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDX.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.87, which is lower than the DMAD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDX.L and DMAD.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDX.L drawdown since its inception was -50.37%, which is greater than DMAD.L's maximum drawdown of -44.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDX.L and DMAD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDX.L	DMAD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.37%	-44.00%	-6.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.93%	-28.54%	-9.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.93%	-34.28%	-3.65%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.52%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-50.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.93%	-28.54%	-9.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.71%	-21.48%	-0.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.16%	10.54%	+5.62%

Volatility

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GDX.L) has a higher volatility of 13.30% compared to Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L) at 10.04%. This indicates that GDX.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DMAD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDX.L	DMAD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.30%	10.04%	+3.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.78%	29.66%	+9.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.47%	36.20%	+11.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.88%	31.42%	+5.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.06%	31.42%	+3.64%

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDX.L has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is higher than DMAD.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDX.L vs. DMAD.L - Dividend Comparison

GDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DMAD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
DMAD.L Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	0.90%	0.74%	2.38%	1.32%
GDX.L VanEck Gold Miners UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDX.L and DMAD.L in my portfolio?

GDX.L and DMAD.L have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GDX.L or DMAD.L?

On fees, DMAD.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDX.L or DMAD.L?

DMAD.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for GDX.L.

What is the main difference between GDX.L and DMAD.L?

GDX.L is categorized as Precious Metals Equities, while DMAD.L is Commodity Producers Equities. GDX.L tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index, while DMAD.L tracks Solactive Disruptive Materials V2 Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for GDX.L and 0.50% for DMAD.L.