HG=F vs. COPX

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

HG=F (Copper) is an asset, while COPX (Global X Copper Miners ETF) is Copper fund tracking the Solactive Global Copper Miners Total Return Index. Their 0.09 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.

Performance

HG=F vs. COPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Copper (HG=F) and Global X Copper Miners ETF (COPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

HG=F

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

COPX

• 1D: 5.83%
• 1M: 9.58%
• 6M: -7.14%
• YTD: 17.39%
• 1Y: 98.51%
• 3Y*: 30.56%
• 5Y*: 20.46%
• 10Y*: 19.71%
• ALL TIME*: 6.17%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
COPX Global X Copper Miners ETF	$203.51M	$201.31M	$296.38M

HG=F vs. COPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
HG=F Copper	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.29%
COPX Global X Copper Miners ETF	17.39%	93.50%	3.57%	8.38%	-0.89%

Correlation

The correlation between HG=F and COPX is 0.09, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2022	0.09

Return for Risk

HG=F vs. COPX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

HG=F

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

COPX

COPX Risk / Return Rank: 74
COPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
COPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
COPX Omega Ratio Rank: 69
COPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
COPX Martin Ratio Rank: 66

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

HG=F vs. COPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Copper (HG=F) and Global X Copper Miners ETF (COPX). 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.

	HG=F	COPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.15	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.50	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.32	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.56	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	8.84	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	HG=F	COPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-83.16%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-27.82%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-39.72%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-42.12%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-11.94%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-39.10%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	11.18%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	HG=F	COPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	14.43%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	38.76%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	46.09%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	37.37%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	35.93%	—

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HG=F and COPX in my portfolio?

HG=F and COPX have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.