GLDI vs. DGZ
GLDI (UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033) and DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) are both exchange-traded funds - GLDI is a Gold fund tracking the Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 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, GLDI returned 7.83%/yr vs -7.12%/yr for DGZ. At a correlation of -0.67, they often move in opposite directions. GLDI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DGZ.
Performance
GLDI vs. DGZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLDI achieves a -4.45% return, which is significantly lower than DGZ's 13.79% return. Over the past 10 years, GLDI has outperformed DGZ with an annualized return of 7.83%, while DGZ has yielded a comparatively lower -7.12% annualized return.
GLDI
- 1D
- -1.62%
- 1M
- -7.19%
- YTD
- -4.45%
- 6M
- -5.42%
- 1Y
- 11.67%
- 3Y*
- 17.47%
- 5Y*
- 10.96%
- 10Y*
- 7.83%
DGZ
- 1D
- 4.60%
- 1M
- 27.91%
- YTD
- 13.79%
- 6M
- 21.33%
- 1Y
- -7.69%
- 3Y*
- -14.24%
- 5Y*
- -9.28%
- 10Y*
- -7.12%
GLDI vs. DGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDI UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 | -4.45% | 34.25% | 17.76% | 8.93% | -1.11% | -3.42% | 23.50% | 14.40% | -0.54% | 8.94% |
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 13.79% | -32.55% | -16.46% | -4.75% | 4.93% | 1.53% | -20.80% | -13.42% | 4.88% | -11.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLDI and DGZ is -0.38, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.38 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.40 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.53 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2013 | -0.67 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between GLDI and DGZ has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.67 to -0.38, 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
GLDI vs. DGZ — Risk / Return Rank
GLDI
DGZ
GLDI vs. DGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 (GLDI) 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.
| GLDI | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.05 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.83 | -0.20 | +1.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.73 | -0.35 | +3.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLDI vs. DGZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLDI drawdown since its inception was -32.26%, smaller than the maximum DGZ drawdown of -86.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDI and DGZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLDI | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.26% | -86.32% | +54.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.14% | -38.32% | +24.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.14% | -59.54% | +45.40% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.14% | -61.54% | +47.40% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -14.94% | -71.49% | +56.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.28% | -80.51% | +67.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.99% | -57.80% | +43.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.30% | 22.24% | -17.94% |
Volatility
GLDI vs. DGZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 (GLDI) is 7.18%, while DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a volatility of 45.91%. This indicates that GLDI 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
| GLDI | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.18% | 45.91% | -38.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.58% | 58.66% | -44.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.99% | 69.62% | -53.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.58% | 36.50% | -24.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.52% | 28.17% | -16.65% |
GLDI vs. DGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLDI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than DGZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLDI vs. DGZ - Dividend Comparison
GLDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 26.67%, 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% |
GLDI UBS AG ETRACS Gold Shares Covered Call ETNs due February 2, 2033 | 26.67% | 16.15% | 10.45% | 10.02% | 13.73% | 10.65% | 14.25% | 7.25% | 5.33% | 7.77% | 17.26% | 10.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLDI and DGZ have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DGZ has higher volatility (45.91%) compared to GLDI (7.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLDI dropped -32.26% vs DGZ's -86.32%.
On 10-year performance, GLDI leads with 7.83% vs -7.12% for DGZ. On fees, GLDI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, GLDI has been the lower-risk option at 7.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GLDI has performed better with a 7.83% return vs -7.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLDI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.
GLDI has the higher dividend yield at 26.67%, compared with 0.00% for DGZ.
GLDI is categorized as Gold, while DGZ is Inverse Commodities. GLDI tracks Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 Index, while DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). They also come from different issuers: UBS and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for GLDI and 0.75% for DGZ.
GLDI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.73 vs -0.11), 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 GLDI 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