GDXD vs. BULZ
GDXD (MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040) and BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - GDXD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GDXD returned -83.55%/yr vs 52.57%/yr for BULZ. Their -0.23 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.
Performance
GDXD vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDXD achieves a -42.32% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 14.01% return.
GDXD
- 1D
- 10.48%
- 1M
- 10.38%
- 6M
- -10.42%
- YTD
- -42.32%
- 1Y
- -91.93%
- 3Y*
- -83.55%
- 5Y*
- -73.29%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -70.78%
BULZ
- 1D
- 1.93%
- 1M
- -17.83%
- 6M
- 15.82%
- YTD
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 74.21%
- 3Y*
- 52.57%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.31%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $23.90M | $29.65M | $44.16M | |
| $19.58M | $21.95M | $29.87M |
GDXD vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 | -42.32% | -97.53% | -57.78% | -52.35% | -52.56% | -20.71% |
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs | 14.01% | 60.09% | 54.09% | 394.22% | -92.26% | 9.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDXD and BULZ is -0.39, 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. | -0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021 | -0.23 |
The correlation between GDXD and BULZ shifts across timeframes, from -0.39 (1 year) to -0.23 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GDXD vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GDXD
BULZ
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
GDXD
BULZ
-
Communication Services
GDXD
-
BULZ
Consumer Cyclical
GDXD
-
BULZ
Consumer Defensive
GDXD
-
BULZ
-
Energy
GDXD
-
BULZ
-
Financial Services
GDXD
-
BULZ
Healthcare
GDXD
-
BULZ
-
Industrials
GDXD
-
BULZ
-
Real Estate
GDXD
-
BULZ
-
Technology
GDXD
-
BULZ
Utilities
GDXD
-
BULZ
-
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
GDXD vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank
GDXD
BULZ
GDXD vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). 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.
| GDXD | BULZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 1.17 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.96 | 1.04 | -2.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.11 | 2.36 | -3.47 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDXD vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDXD drawdown since its inception was -99.96%, which is greater than BULZ's maximum drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXD and BULZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDXD | BULZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.96% | -94.44% | -5.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -95.95% | -55.29% | -40.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -99.86% | -67.96% | -31.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -99.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.92% | -46.29% | -53.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -72.59% | -57.57% | -15.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 83.56% | 24.42% | +59.14% |
Volatility
GDXD vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) has a higher volatility of 40.76% compared to MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) at 31.48%. This indicates that GDXD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDXD | BULZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 40.76% | 31.48% | +9.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 118.25% | 70.05% | +48.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 146.68% | 85.72% | +60.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 112.62% | 92.08% | +20.54% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 110.97% | 92.08% | +18.89% |
GDXD vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GDXD and BULZ have an expense ratio of 0.95%.
Dividends
GDXD vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison
Neither GDXD nor BULZ has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GDXD and BULZ have a correlation of -0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXD has higher volatility (40.76%) compared to BULZ (31.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXD dropped -99.96% vs BULZ's -94.44%.
On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 52.57% vs -83.55% for GDXD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, BULZ has been the lower-risk option at 31.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 52.57% return vs -83.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDXD and BULZ have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.
GDXD and BULZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
GDXD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while BULZ is Leveraged Equities. GDXD tracks S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while BULZ tracks Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%).
BULZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.67 vs -0.63), 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 GDXD and BULZ
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