GIGB.L vs. DMAD.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

GIGB.L (VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and DMAD.L (Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - GIGB.L is a Mining Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Mining Reduced Coal 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, GIGB.L returned 18.86%/yr vs 11.13%/yr for DMAD.L. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

GIGB.L vs. DMAD.L - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GIGB.L achieves a -2.57% return, which is significantly higher than DMAD.L's -5.68% return.

GIGB.L

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: -18.03%
• 6M: -13.67%
• YTD: -2.57%
• 1Y: 48.15%
• 3Y*: 18.86%
• 5Y*: 12.75%
• 10Y*: —

DMAD.L

• 1D: -2.20%
• 1M: -19.96%
• 6M: -16.91%
• YTD: -5.68%
• 1Y: 48.12%
• 3Y*: 11.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GIGB.L VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-2.57%	77.74%	-7.37%	-1.37%	10.89%
DMAD.L Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-5.68%	83.26%	-5.93%	-23.95%	-12.91%

Correlation

The correlation between GIGB.L and DMAD.L is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2022	0.78

The correlation between GIGB.L and DMAD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GIGB.L vs. DMAD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GIGB.L

GIGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 48
GIGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
GIGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
GIGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 49
GIGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
GIGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GIGB.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.

	GIGB.L	DMAD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.39	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.92	1.88	+0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.23	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	1.69	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.84	4.76	+0.09

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

The current GIGB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the DMAD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIGB.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

GIGB.L vs. DMAD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIGB.L drawdown since its inception was -45.07%, smaller than the maximum DMAD.L drawdown of -47.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIGB.L and DMAD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	GIGB.L	DMAD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.07%	-47.80%	+2.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.52%	-28.37%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.52%	-34.78%	+8.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-26.32%	-28.37%	+2.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.83%	-24.26%	+9.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.91%	10.09%	-0.18%

Volatility

GIGB.L vs. DMAD.L - Volatility Comparison

VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (GIGB.L) and Global X Disruptive Materials UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (DMAD.L) have volatilities of 10.11% and 9.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GIGB.L	DMAD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.11%	9.69%	+0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.40%	27.97%	+0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	33.92%	34.57%	-0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.68%	29.20%	+0.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.36%	29.20%	+0.16%

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

Both GIGB.L and DMAD.L have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

GIGB.L vs. DMAD.L - Dividend Comparison

GIGB.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%
GIGB.L VanEck S&P Global Mining UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

GIGB.L and DMAD.L have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

GIGB.L and DMAD.L have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

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

GIGB.L is categorized as Mining Equities, while DMAD.L is Commodity Producers Equities. GIGB.L tracks S&P Global Mining Reduced Coal Index, while DMAD.L tracks Solactive Disruptive Materials V2 Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Global X.