GDXD vs. LENS
GDXD (MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040) and LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDXD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while LENS is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. GDXD is passively managed, while LENS is actively managed. Over the past year, GDXD returned -91.93% vs 48.47% for LENS. Their -0.88 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. GDXD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LENS.
Performance
GDXD vs. LENS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDXD achieves a -42.32% return, which is significantly lower than LENS's 4.83% 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%
LENS
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 3.09%
- 6M
- -9.06%
- YTD
- 4.83%
- 1Y
- 48.47%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 39.04%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $19.58M | $21.95M | $29.87M | |
| $447.09K | $425.48K | $464.75K |
GDXD vs. LENS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 | -42.32% | -96.56% |
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF | 4.83% | 56.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDXD and LENS is -0.90, 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. | -0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2025 | -0.88 |
The correlation between GDXD and LENS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.90 to -0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. LENS — Risk / Return Rank
GDXD
LENS
GDXD vs. LENS - 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 Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS). 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 | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 1.31 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.96 | 2.00 | -2.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.11 | 4.72 | -5.84 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDXD vs. LENS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDXD drawdown since its inception was -99.96%, which is greater than LENS's maximum drawdown of -24.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXD and LENS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDXD | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.96% | -24.55% | -75.41% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -95.95% | -24.55% | -71.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -99.86% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -99.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.92% | -20.11% | -79.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -72.59% | -5.52% | -67.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 83.56% | 10.38% | +73.18% |
Volatility
GDXD vs. LENS - Volatility Comparison
MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) has a higher volatility of 40.76% compared to Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) at 5.66%. This indicates that GDXD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LENS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDXD | LENS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 40.76% | 5.66% | +35.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 118.25% | 22.09% | +96.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 146.68% | 28.06% | +118.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 112.62% | 25.56% | +87.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 110.97% | 25.56% | +85.41% |
GDXD vs. LENS - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDXD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than LENS's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDXD vs. LENS - Dividend Comparison
GDXD has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF | 1.53% | 1.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GDXD and LENS have a correlation of -0.90, 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 LENS (5.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXD dropped -99.96% vs LENS's -24.55%.
On 1-year performance, LENS leads with 48.47% vs -91.93% for GDXD. On fees, LENS is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, LENS has been the lower-risk option at 5.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LENS has performed better with a 48.47% return vs -91.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LENS is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GDXD.
LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.00% for GDXD.
GDXD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while LENS is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: BMO and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GDXD and 0.79% for LENS.
LENS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 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 LENS
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