GLL vs. AGQ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) and AGQ (ProShares Ultra Silver) are both exchange-traded funds - GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while AGQ is a Silver fund tracking the Bloomberg Silver Subindex (200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLL returned -21.56%/yr vs 6.90%/yr for AGQ. At a correlation of -0.79, they often move in opposite directions. GLL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.93%/yr for AGQ.

Performance

GLL vs. AGQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) and ProShares Ultra Silver (AGQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLL achieves a -4.93% return, which is significantly higher than AGQ's -46.29% return. Over the past 10 years, GLL has underperformed AGQ with an annualized return of -21.56%, while AGQ has yielded a comparatively higher 6.90% annualized return.

GLL

• 1D: 1.30%
• 1M: 14.51%
• YTD: -4.93%
• 6M: 0.89%
• 1Y: -42.21%
• 3Y*: -40.08%
• 5Y*: -29.04%
• 10Y*: -21.56%

AGQ

• 1D: -1.92%
• 1M: -27.43%
• YTD: -46.29%
• 6M: -45.77%
• 1Y: 75.71%
• 3Y*: 47.17%
• 5Y*: 13.07%
• 10Y*: 6.90%

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

GLL vs. AGQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold	-4.93%	-62.81%	-33.33%	-14.91%	-2.12%	1.66%	-41.47%	-26.95%	5.39%	-23.67%
AGQ ProShares Ultra Silver	-46.29%	360.71%	23.92%	-15.09%	-7.89%	-32.25%	62.02%	20.02%	-22.10%	5.49%

Correlation

The correlation between GLL and AGQ is -0.79, 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	-0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.76
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.76
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2008	-0.79

The correlation between GLL and AGQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.79 to -0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLL vs. AGQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLL

GLL Risk / Return Rank: 3
GLL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Martin Ratio Rank: 4

AGQ

AGQ Risk / Return Rank: 25
AGQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
AGQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
AGQ Omega Ratio Rank: 39
AGQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
AGQ Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

GLL vs. AGQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) and ProShares Ultra Silver (AGQ). 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.

	GLL	AGQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.78	0.62	-1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.13	1.55	-2.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.25	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.65	0.95	-1.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.98	1.75	-2.74

GLL vs. AGQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLL Sharpe Ratio is -0.78, which is lower than the AGQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLL and AGQ, 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

GLL vs. AGQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLL drawdown since its inception was -99.24%, roughly equal to the maximum AGQ drawdown of -98.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLL and AGQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLL	AGQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.24%	-98.16%	-1.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.10%	-79.89%	+14.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-87.95%	-79.89%	-8.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-89.76%	-79.89%	-9.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-95.76%	-79.89%	-15.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-98.82%	-88.59%	-10.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-85.15%	-79.86%	-5.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	43.00%	43.33%	-0.33%

Volatility

GLL vs. AGQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) is 15.88%, while ProShares Ultra Silver (AGQ) has a volatility of 27.83%. This indicates that GLL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AGQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLL	AGQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.88%	27.83%	-11.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	46.76%	134.92%	-88.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	54.33%	123.30%	-68.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.36%	75.37%	-39.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.42%	66.08%	-33.66%

GLL vs. AGQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than AGQ's 0.93% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLL vs. AGQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither GLL nor AGQ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLL and AGQ in my portfolio?

GLL and AGQ have a correlation of -0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLL or AGQ?

AGQ has higher volatility (27.83%) compared to GLL (15.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLL dropped -99.24% vs AGQ's -98.16%.

Which ETF is better, GLL or AGQ?

On 10-year performance, AGQ leads with 6.90% vs -21.56% for GLL. On fees, AGQ is cheaper at 0.93% per year. On volatility, GLL has been the lower-risk option at 15.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLL or AGQ?

Over the 10-year period, AGQ has performed better with a 6.90% return vs -21.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLL or AGQ?

AGQ is cheaper with a 0.93% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLL or AGQ?

GLL and AGQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GLL and AGQ?

GLL is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while AGQ is Silver. GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while AGQ tracks Bloomberg Silver Subindex (200%). Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GLL and 0.93% for AGQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AGQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.62 vs -0.78), 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.