NRES vs. DBJP

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NRES (Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF) and DBJP (Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NRES is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Xtrackers, while DBJP is a Japan Equities fund tracking the MSCI Japan US Dollar Hedged Index. NRES is actively managed, while DBJP is passively managed. Over the past year, NRES returned 39.69% vs 54.21% for DBJP. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.45% expense ratio.

Performance

NRES vs. DBJP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NRES achieves a 17.26% return, which is significantly lower than DBJP's 20.90% return.

NRES

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -1.74%
• YTD: 17.26%
• 6M: 19.19%
• 1Y: 39.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DBJP

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 7.21%
• YTD: 20.90%
• 6M: 23.04%
• 1Y: 54.21%
• 3Y*: 29.43%
• 5Y*: 21.52%
• 10Y*: 16.31%

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

NRES vs. DBJP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NRES Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF	17.26%	27.08%	-2.78%
DBJP Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF	20.90%	29.51%	8.58%

Correlation

The correlation between NRES and DBJP is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2024	0.38

NRES vs. DBJP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NRES	DBJP
Basic Materials	44.2%	3.0%
Energy	39.8%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.4%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.7%	3.6%
Real Estate	1.1%	2.3%
Healthcare	0.9%	6.3%
Industrials	0.8%	26.0%
Communication Services	-	7.9%
Financial Services	-	17.5%
Technology	-	19.1%
Utilities	-	1.1%

Return for Risk

NRES vs. DBJP — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRES

NRES Risk / Return Rank: 77
NRES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
NRES Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
NRES Omega Ratio Rank: 70
NRES Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
NRES Martin Ratio Rank: 85

DBJP

DBJP Risk / Return Rank: 88
DBJP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
DBJP Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
DBJP Omega Ratio Rank: 86
DBJP Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
DBJP Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

NRES vs. DBJP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP). 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.

	NRES	DBJP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	2.92	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	3.99	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.52	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.71	5.24	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.95	20.44	-3.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NRES vs. DBJP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRES Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is comparable to the DBJP Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRES and DBJP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NRES	DBJP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.39	2.92	-0.53
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.84	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.99	0.68	+0.31

Drawdowns

NRES vs. DBJP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRES drawdown since its inception was -22.22%, smaller than the maximum DBJP drawdown of -31.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRES and DBJP.

Drawdown Indicators

	NRES	DBJP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.22%	-31.30%	+9.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.47%	-10.39%	+1.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.50%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.50%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-31.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.65%	0.00%	-3.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.21%	-7.29%	+2.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	2.66%	-0.31%

Volatility

NRES vs. DBJP - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) has a higher volatility of 4.57% compared to Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF (DBJP) at 3.53%. This indicates that NRES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBJP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NRES	DBJP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	3.53%	+1.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.17%	13.79%	-0.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.67%	18.68%	-2.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.99%	18.93%	-0.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.99%	19.46%	-1.47%

NRES vs. DBJP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NRES and DBJP have an expense ratio of 0.45%.

Dividends

NRES vs. DBJP - Dividend Comparison

NRES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, less than DBJP's 2.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DBJP Xtrackers MSCI Japan Hedged Equity ETF	2.33%	2.81%	2.80%	5.21%	0.80%	2.30%	2.53%	2.56%	3.87%	2.07%	1.13%	5.95%
NRES Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF	2.27%	2.65%	3.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NRES and DBJP in my portfolio?

NRES and DBJP have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NRES or DBJP?

NRES has higher volatility (4.57%) compared to DBJP (3.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NRES dropped -22.22% vs DBJP's -31.30%.

Which ETF is better, NRES or DBJP?

On 1-year performance, DBJP leads with 54.21% vs 39.69% for NRES. Both ETFs have the same 0.45% expense ratio. On volatility, DBJP has been the lower-risk option at 3.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NRES or DBJP?

Over the 1-year period, DBJP has performed better with a 54.21% return vs 39.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NRES or DBJP?

NRES and DBJP have the same expense ratio: 0.45% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NRES or DBJP?

DBJP has the higher dividend yield at 2.33%, compared with 2.27% for NRES.

What is the main difference between NRES and DBJP?

NRES is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while DBJP is Japan Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBJP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 2.39), 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.