GLL vs. MAGS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) and MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. GLL is passively managed, while MAGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GLL returned -39.64%/yr vs 31.29%/yr for MAGS. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. GLL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for MAGS.

Performance

GLL vs. MAGS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLL achieves a -5.47% return, which is significantly lower than MAGS's -1.59% return.

GLL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 23.29%
• YTD: -5.47%
• 6M: -6.08%
• 1Y: -41.70%
• 3Y*: -39.64%
• 5Y*: -27.61%
• 10Y*: -22.08%

MAGS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -7.97%
• YTD: -1.59%
• 6M: -0.43%
• 1Y: 23.09%
• 3Y*: 31.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GLL vs. MAGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold	-5.47%	-62.81%	-33.33%	0.19%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	-1.59%	22.99%	63.97%	35.74%

Correlation

The correlation between GLL and MAGS is -0.18, 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	-0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2023	-0.07

The correlation between GLL and MAGS shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to -0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

GLL vs. MAGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLL

GLL Risk / Return Rank: 4
GLL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Omega Ratio Rank: 3
GLL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
GLL Martin Ratio Rank: 5

MAGS

MAGS Risk / Return Rank: 33
MAGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
MAGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Omega Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
MAGS Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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. MAGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). 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	MAGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.78	1.14	-1.92
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.12	1.62	-2.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.20	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.64	1.25	-1.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.98	4.21	-5.19

GLL vs. MAGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLL Sharpe Ratio is -0.78, which is lower than the MAGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLL and MAGS, 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. MAGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLL drawdown since its inception was -99.24%, which is greater than MAGS's maximum drawdown of -29.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLL and MAGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLL	MAGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-99.24%	-29.91%	-69.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.10%	-18.62%	-46.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-87.95%	-29.91%	-58.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-89.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-95.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-98.83%	-8.50%	-90.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-85.13%	-4.72%	-80.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	42.47%	5.50%	+36.97%

Volatility

GLL vs. MAGS - Volatility Comparison

ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) has a higher volatility of 15.23% compared to Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) at 5.86%. This indicates that GLL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MAGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLL	MAGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.23%	5.86%	+9.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	46.29%	15.07%	+31.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	53.94%	20.30%	+33.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.34%	25.97%	+10.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.38%	25.97%	+6.41%

GLL vs. MAGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than MAGS's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLL vs. MAGS - Dividend Comparison

GLL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MAGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	1.50%	1.48%	0.81%	0.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLL and MAGS in my portfolio?

GLL and MAGS have a correlation of -0.18, 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 MAGS?

GLL has higher volatility (15.23%) compared to MAGS (5.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLL dropped -99.24% vs MAGS's -29.91%.

Which ETF is better, GLL or MAGS?

On 3-year performance, MAGS leads with 31.29% vs -39.64% for GLL. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLL or MAGS?

Over the 3-year period, MAGS has performed better with a 31.29% return vs -39.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLL or MAGS?

MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.

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

MAGS has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.00% for GLL.

What is the main difference between GLL and MAGS?

GLL is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while MAGS is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GLL and 0.29% for MAGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.14 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.