PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GLDM vs. DGZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GLDM vs. DGZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) and DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLDM achieves a 0.06% return, which is significantly lower than DGZ's 2.40% return.


GLDM

1D
-3.67%
1M
-8.00%
YTD
0.06%
6M
2.68%
1Y
28.49%
3Y*
29.91%
5Y*
17.81%
10Y*

DGZ

1D
2.19%
1M
0.85%
YTD
2.40%
6M
4.65%
1Y
-16.19%
3Y*
-16.58%
5Y*
-10.10%
10Y*
-8.70%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GLDM vs. DGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
0.06%64.20%27.08%13.04%-0.47%-4.01%25.10%18.10%1.84%
DGZ
DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes
2.40%-32.55%-16.46%-4.75%4.93%1.53%-20.80%-13.42%0.04%

Correlation

The correlation between GLDM and DGZ is -0.40, 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

-0.40

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.46

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2018

-0.66

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between GLDM and DGZ has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.66 to -0.40, 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

GLDM vs. DGZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLDM
GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

DGZ
DGZ Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
DGZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGZ Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
DGZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGZ Martin Ratio Rank: 66
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GLDM vs. DGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) 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.


GLDMDGZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.01

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.43

-0.42

+1.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.63

-0.74

+4.37

GLDM vs. DGZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLDM Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is higher than the DGZ Sharpe Ratio of -0.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLDM and DGZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GLDMDGZDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.07

-0.24

+1.32

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.99

-0.29

+1.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.99

-0.32

+1.30

Drawdowns

GLDM vs. DGZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLDM drawdown since its inception was -21.63%, smaller than the maximum DGZ drawdown of -86.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLDM and DGZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GLDMDGZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.63%

-86.32%

+64.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.00%

-38.32%

+18.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.00%

-59.54%

+39.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.92%

-61.54%

+40.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-71.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-20.00%

-82.46%

+62.46%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.23%

-57.75%

+51.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.86%

21.89%

-14.03%

Volatility

GLDM vs. DGZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) is 5.65%, while DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a volatility of 43.28%. This indicates that GLDM 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


GLDMDGZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.65%

43.28%

-37.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.31%

55.04%

-31.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.65%

66.45%

-39.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.97%

35.25%

-17.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.90%

27.42%

-10.52%

GLDM vs. DGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLDM has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than DGZ's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

GLDM vs. DGZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLDM nor DGZ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GLDM and DGZ have a correlation of -0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DGZ has higher volatility (43.28%) compared to GLDM (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLDM dropped -21.63% vs DGZ's -86.32%.

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 17.81% vs -10.10% for DGZ. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GLDM has been the lower-risk option at 5.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 17.81% return vs -10.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.

GLDM and DGZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

GLDM is categorized as Gold, while DGZ is Inverse Commodities. GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM, while DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). They also come from different issuers: State Street and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for GLDM and 0.75% for DGZ.

GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.07 vs -0.24), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GLDM 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