GDXD vs. NRGD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

GDXD (MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040) and NRGD (MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - GDXD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while NRGD is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GDXD returned -91.93% vs -80.85% for NRGD. Their -0.11 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. Both charge a 0.95% expense ratio.

Performance

GDXD vs. NRGD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) and MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDXD achieves a -42.32% return, which is significantly higher than NRGD's -76.50% 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%

NRGD

• 1D: -4.00%
• 1M: -39.03%
• 6M: -66.80%
• YTD: -76.50%
• 1Y: -80.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -72.99%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040	$19.58M	$21.95M	$29.87M
NRGD MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	$596.57K	$512.25K	$693.52K

GDXD vs. NRGD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GDXD MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040	-42.32%	-95.29%
NRGD MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN	-76.50%	-35.40%

Correlation

The correlation between GDXD and NRGD is -0.11, 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.	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	-0.11

GDXD vs. NRGD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GDXD	NRGD
Basic Materials	100.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GDXD vs. NRGD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GDXD

GDXD Risk / Return Rank: 2
GDXD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
GDXD Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
GDXD Omega Ratio Rank: 2
GDXD Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
GDXD Martin Ratio Rank: 4

NRGD

NRGD Risk / Return Rank: 0
NRGD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
NRGD Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
NRGD Omega Ratio Rank: 0
NRGD Calmar Ratio Rank: 0
NRGD Martin Ratio Rank: 0

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GDXD vs. NRGD - 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 U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD). 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	NRGD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	-1.06	+0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.50	-2.32	+0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.84	0.76	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.96	-0.98	+0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.11	-1.50	+0.39

GDXD vs. NRGD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDXD Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is higher than the NRGD Sharpe Ratio of -1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDXD and NRGD, 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

GDXD vs. NRGD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDXD drawdown since its inception was -99.96%, which is greater than NRGD's maximum drawdown of -91.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXD and NRGD.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDXD	NRGD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.96%	-91.37%	-8.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-95.95%	-82.12%	-13.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-99.86%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-99.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-99.92%	-91.37%	-8.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-72.59%	-61.97%	-10.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	83.56%	53.39%	+30.17%

Volatility

GDXD vs. NRGD - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors Gold Miners -3X Inverse Leveraged ETNs due June 29, 2040 (GDXD) has a higher volatility of 40.76% compared to MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index -3X Inverse Leveraged ETN (NRGD) at 23.01%. This indicates that GDXD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NRGD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDXD	NRGD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	40.76%	23.01%	+17.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	118.25%	60.45%	+57.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	146.68%	76.10%	+70.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	112.62%	87.89%	+24.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	110.97%	87.89%	+23.08%

GDXD vs. NRGD - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both GDXD and NRGD have an expense ratio of 0.95%.

Dividends

GDXD vs. NRGD - Dividend Comparison

Neither GDXD nor NRGD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDXD and NRGD in my portfolio?

GDXD and NRGD have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDXD or NRGD?

GDXD has higher volatility (40.76%) compared to NRGD (23.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXD dropped -99.96% vs NRGD's -91.37%.

Which ETF is better, GDXD or NRGD?

On 1-year performance, NRGD leads with -80.85% vs -91.93% for GDXD. Both ETFs have the same 0.95% expense ratio. On volatility, NRGD has been the lower-risk option at 23.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDXD or NRGD?

Over the 1-year period, NRGD has performed better with a -80.85% return vs -91.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDXD or NRGD?

GDXD and NRGD have the same expense ratio: 0.95% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDXD or NRGD?

GDXD and NRGD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GDXD and NRGD?

GDXD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while NRGD is Leveraged Equities. GDXD tracks S-Network MicroSectors Gold Miners Index, while NRGD tracks Solactive MicroSectors U.S. Big Oil Index (-300%).

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDXD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.63 vs -1.06), 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.