GDX vs. DGZ
GDX (VanEck Gold Miners ETF) and DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) are both exchange-traded funds - GDX is a Gold fund tracking the NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index, while DGZ is a Inverse Commodities fund tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GDX returned 10.07%/yr vs -7.90%/yr for DGZ. Their -0.64 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. GDX charges 0.51%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DGZ.
Performance
GDX vs. DGZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDX achieves a -13.61% return, which is significantly lower than DGZ's 1.46% return. Over the past 10 years, GDX has outperformed DGZ with an annualized return of 10.07%, while DGZ has yielded a comparatively lower -7.90% annualized return.
GDX
- 1D
- -3.49%
- 1M
- -5.52%
- 6M
- -21.34%
- YTD
- -13.61%
- 1Y
- 42.30%
- 3Y*
- 36.42%
- 5Y*
- 17.86%
- 10Y*
- 10.07%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.56%
DGZ
- 1D
- -2.65%
- 1M
- -11.56%
- 6M
- 3.27%
- YTD
- 1.46%
- 1Y
- -15.73%
- 3Y*
- -17.39%
- 5Y*
- -11.06%
- 10Y*
- -7.90%
- ALL TIME*
- -7.69%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $27.40K | $33.87K | $42.21K | |
| $1.26B | $1.34B | $1.78B |
GDX vs. DGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF | -13.61% | 154.77% | 10.63% | 9.98% | -9.01% | -9.52% | 23.66% | 39.84% | -8.77% | 11.99% |
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 1.46% | -32.55% | -16.46% | -4.75% | 4.93% | 1.53% | -20.80% | -13.42% | 4.88% | -11.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDX and DGZ is -0.23, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.32 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | -0.44 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | -0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 29, 2008 | -0.64 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between GDX and DGZ has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.64 to -0.23, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.
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
GDX vs. DGZ — Risk / Return Rank
GDX
DGZ
GDX vs. DGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) 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.
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 | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.02 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.15 | -0.49 | +1.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.48 | -0.86 | +3.35 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDX vs. DGZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDX drawdown since its inception was -80.34%, smaller than the maximum DGZ drawdown of -86.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDX and DGZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDX | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.34% | -86.32% | +5.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -38.93% | -36.14% | -2.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -38.93% | -59.54% | +20.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -46.51% | -61.54% | +15.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -49.79% | -71.49% | +21.70% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.03% | -82.62% | +46.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -40.37% | -57.94% | +17.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.97% | 20.58% | -2.61% |
Volatility
GDX vs. DGZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) is 12.73%, while DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a volatility of 19.90%. This indicates that GDX 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
| GDX | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.73% | 19.90% | -7.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 39.94% | 60.03% | -20.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 48.49% | 71.95% | -23.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.23% | 37.59% | -0.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.34% | 28.84% | +8.50% |
GDX vs. DGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDX has a 0.51% expense ratio, which is lower than DGZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDX vs. DGZ - Dividend Comparison
GDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, while DGZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF | 0.85% | 0.74% | 1.19% | 1.61% | 1.66% | 1.67% | 0.53% | 0.67% | 0.50% | 0.76% | 0.26% | 0.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDX and DGZ have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DGZ has higher volatility (19.90%) compared to GDX (12.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDX dropped -80.34% vs DGZ's -86.32%.
On 10-year performance, GDX leads with 10.07% vs -7.90% for DGZ. On fees, GDX is cheaper at 0.51% per year. On volatility, GDX has been the lower-risk option at 12.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GDX has performed better with a 10.07% return vs -7.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDX is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.
GDX has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.00% for DGZ.
GDX is categorized as Gold, while DGZ is Inverse Commodities. GDX tracks NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index, while DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.51% for GDX and 0.75% for DGZ.
GDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.92 vs -0.25), 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 GDX 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