GLL vs. DGZ
GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) and DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) are both exchange-traded funds - GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%), 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, GLL returned -23.37%/yr vs -8.68%/yr for DGZ. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GLL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DGZ.
Performance
GLL vs. DGZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLL achieves a -14.49% return, which is significantly lower than DGZ's 2.71% return. Over the past 10 years, GLL has underperformed DGZ with an annualized return of -23.37%, while DGZ has yielded a comparatively higher -8.68% annualized return.
GLL
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- 3.37%
- YTD
- -14.49%
- 6M
- -18.72%
- 1Y
- -48.24%
- 3Y*
- -41.46%
- 5Y*
- -28.82%
- 10Y*
- -23.37%
DGZ
- 1D
- 4.82%
- 1M
- 16.59%
- YTD
- 2.71%
- 6M
- 4.61%
- 1Y
- -15.32%
- 3Y*
- -16.62%
- 5Y*
- -10.05%
- 10Y*
- -8.68%
GLL vs. DGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | -14.49% | -62.81% | -33.33% | -14.91% | -2.12% | 1.66% | -41.47% | -26.95% | 5.39% | -23.67% |
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 2.71% | -32.55% | -16.46% | -4.75% | 4.93% | 1.53% | -20.80% | -13.42% | 4.88% | -11.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLL and DGZ is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| 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 (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2008 | 0.82 |
Over the past year, the correlation between GLL and DGZ has dropped to 0.40 - well below their long-term average of 0.82, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
GLL vs. DGZ — Risk / Return Rank
GLL
DGZ
GLL vs. DGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) 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.
| GLL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.83 | 1.01 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.74 | -0.40 | -0.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.16 | -0.70 | -0.45 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.92 | -0.23 | -0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.81 | -0.29 | -0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.73 | -0.32 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.67 | -0.31 | -0.36 |
Drawdowns
GLL vs. DGZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLL drawdown since its inception was -99.24%, which is greater than DGZ's maximum drawdown of -86.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLL and DGZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.24% | -86.32% | -12.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -65.10% | -38.32% | -26.78% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -87.95% | -59.54% | -28.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -89.76% | -61.54% | -28.22% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -95.76% | -71.49% | -24.27% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.94% | -82.41% | -16.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -85.13% | -57.74% | -27.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 41.74% | 21.80% | +19.94% |
Volatility
GLL vs. DGZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) is 11.07%, while DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a volatility of 45.00%. This indicates that GLL 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
| GLL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.07% | 45.00% | -33.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 44.43% | 54.96% | -10.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 52.38% | 66.38% | -14.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.90% | 35.24% | +0.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.12% | 27.40% | +4.72% |
GLL vs. DGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than DGZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLL vs. DGZ - Dividend Comparison
Neither GLL nor DGZ has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
GLL 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 (45.00%) compared to GLL (11.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLL dropped -99.24% vs DGZ's -86.32%.
On 10-year performance, DGZ leads with -8.68% vs -23.37% for GLL. On fees, DGZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, GLL has been the lower-risk option at 11.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, DGZ has performed better with a -8.68% return vs -23.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DGZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.
GLL and DGZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
GLL is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while DGZ is Inverse Commodities. GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GLL and 0.75% for DGZ.
DGZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.23 vs -0.92), 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 GLL 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