GLL vs. NOBL
GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while NOBL is a Dividend fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLL returned -20.80%/yr vs 10.02%/yr for NOBL. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. GLL charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.
Performance
GLL vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLL achieves a 4.59% return, which is significantly lower than NOBL's 6.93% return. Over the past 10 years, GLL has underperformed NOBL with an annualized return of -20.80%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively higher 10.02% annualized return.
GLL
- 1D
- 5.97%
- 1M
- 25.98%
- YTD
- 4.59%
- 6M
- 12.64%
- 1Y
- -38.04%
- 3Y*
- -38.14%
- 5Y*
- -27.61%
- 10Y*
- -20.80%
NOBL
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 2.70%
- YTD
- 6.93%
- 6M
- 5.89%
- 1Y
- 12.41%
- 3Y*
- 8.66%
- 5Y*
- 6.13%
- 10Y*
- 10.02%
GLL vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 4.59% | -62.81% | -33.33% | -14.91% | -2.12% | 1.66% | -41.47% | -26.95% | 5.39% | -23.67% |
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 6.93% | 6.84% | 6.72% | 8.09% | -6.52% | 25.46% | 8.35% | 27.39% | -3.26% | 21.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLL and NOBL 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 | -0.13 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.12 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2013 | -0.01 |
The correlation between GLL and NOBL shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank
GLL
NOBL
GLL vs. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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 | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.79 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.90 | 1.19 | -0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.59 | 1.37 | -1.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.88 | 3.47 | -4.35 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLL vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLL drawdown since its inception was -99.24%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLL and NOBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLL | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.24% | -35.43% | -63.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -65.10% | -9.11% | -55.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -87.95% | -15.36% | -72.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -89.76% | -17.92% | -71.84% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -95.76% | -35.43% | -60.33% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -98.70% | -2.89% | -95.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -85.16% | -3.48% | -81.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 43.16% | 3.59% | +39.57% |
Volatility
GLL vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) has a higher volatility of 16.87% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 3.31%. This indicates that GLL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLL | NOBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.87% | 3.31% | +13.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 47.26% | 8.22% | +39.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 54.71% | 11.47% | +43.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.50% | 14.38% | +22.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.36% | 16.60% | +15.76% |
GLL vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLL has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
GLL vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison
GLL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NOBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.05%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 2.05% | 2.14% | 2.05% | 2.09% | 1.94% | 1.89% | 2.14% | 1.89% | 2.37% | 1.74% | 2.13% | 2.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLL and NOBL 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.
GLL has higher volatility (16.87%) compared to NOBL (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLL dropped -99.24% vs NOBL's -35.43%.
On 10-year performance, NOBL leads with 10.02% vs -20.80% for GLL. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, NOBL has performed better with a 10.02% return vs -20.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.
NOBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.05%, compared with 0.00% for GLL.
GLL is categorized as Leveraged Commodities, while NOBL is Dividend. GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for GLL and 0.35% for NOBL.
NOBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs -0.70), 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 NOBL
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