MAGS vs. GLL
MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) and GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) are both exchange-traded funds - MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%). MAGS is actively managed, while GLL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MAGS returned 31.30%/yr vs -37.61%/yr for GLL. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. MAGS charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for GLL.
Performance
MAGS vs. GLL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MAGS achieves a 1.47% return, which is significantly lower than GLL's 3.56% return.
MAGS
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 2.28%
- 6M
- 3.13%
- YTD
- 1.47%
- 1Y
- 18.75%
- 3Y*
- 31.30%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 36.61%
GLL
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 10.35%
- 6M
- 17.03%
- YTD
- 3.56%
- 1Y
- -37.98%
- 3Y*
- -37.61%
- 5Y*
- -27.32%
- 10Y*
- -20.81%
- ALL TIME*
- -21.71%
MAGS vs. GLL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | 1.47% | 22.99% | 63.97% | 35.74% |
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 3.56% | -62.81% | -33.33% | 0.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between MAGS and GLL is -0.23, 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 | -0.23 |
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 | -0.08 |
The correlation between MAGS and GLL shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to -0.08 (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
MAGS vs. GLL — Risk / Return Rank
MAGS
GLL
MAGS vs. GLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) and ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL). 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.
| MAGS | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 0.90 | +0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.01 | -0.59 | +1.60 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.11 | -0.85 | +3.96 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MAGS vs. GLL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MAGS drawdown since its inception was -29.91%, smaller than the maximum GLL drawdown of -99.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGS and GLL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MAGS | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.91% | -99.24% | +69.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.62% | -65.10% | +46.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.91% | -87.95% | +58.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -89.76% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -95.76% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.65% | -98.71% | +93.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.81% | -85.21% | +80.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.04% | 44.53% | -38.49% |
Volatility
MAGS vs. GLL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) is 7.49%, while ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) has a volatility of 12.38%. This indicates that MAGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MAGS | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.49% | 12.38% | -4.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.68% | 46.47% | -29.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.47% | 55.29% | -33.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.00% | 36.74% | -10.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.00% | 32.43% | -6.43% |
MAGS vs. GLL - Expense Ratio Comparison
MAGS has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than GLL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
MAGS vs. GLL - Dividend Comparison
MAGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, while GLL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | 1.46% | 1.48% | 0.81% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MAGS and GLL have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLL has higher volatility (12.38%) compared to MAGS (7.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGS dropped -29.91% vs GLL's -99.24%.
On 3-year performance, MAGS leads with 31.30% vs -37.61% for GLL. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 7.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MAGS has performed better with a 31.30% return vs -37.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.
MAGS has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 0.00% for GLL.
MAGS is categorized as Technology Equities, while GLL is Leveraged Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for MAGS and 0.95% for GLL.
MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.88 vs -0.69), 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 MAGS and GLL
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