PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NUGT vs. GLDM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NUGT vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF (NUGT) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUGT achieves a -32.09% return, which is significantly lower than GLDM's -4.72% return.


NUGT

1D
-9.53%
1M
-19.60%
YTD
-32.09%
6M
-39.03%
1Y
60.88%
3Y*
55.65%
5Y*
17.04%
10Y*
-11.63%

GLDM

1D
-1.91%
1M
-8.82%
YTD
-4.72%
6M
-8.62%
1Y
21.66%
3Y*
28.79%
5Y*
18.18%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NUGT vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
NUGT
Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF
-32.09%425.05%2.89%2.60%-32.10%-26.31%-60.16%100.73%-25.75%
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
-4.72%64.20%27.08%13.04%-0.47%-4.01%25.10%18.10%1.75%

Correlation

The correlation between NUGT and GLDM is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.80

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2018

0.78

The correlation between NUGT and GLDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

NUGT vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUGT
NUGT Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
NUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
NUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
NUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
NUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

GLDM
GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

NUGT vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF (NUGT) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). 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.


NUGTGLDMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.17

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.96

0.89

+0.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.30

2.40

-0.10

NUGT vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUGT Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is comparable to the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUGT and GLDM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

NUGT vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUGT drawdown since its inception was -99.97%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -24.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUGT and GLDM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NUGTGLDMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.97%

-24.35%

-75.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-63.43%

-24.35%

-39.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-63.43%

-24.35%

-39.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-73.72%

-24.35%

-49.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-96.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.84%

-23.82%

-76.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-91.53%

-6.32%

-85.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

26.52%

9.05%

+17.47%

Volatility

NUGT vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF (NUGT) has a higher volatility of 35.11% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 8.16%. This indicates that NUGT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NUGTGLDMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

35.11%

8.16%

+26.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

80.35%

24.22%

+56.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

94.31%

27.36%

+66.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

72.94%

18.15%

+54.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

87.97%

17.02%

+70.95%

NUGT vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUGT has a 1.13% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

NUGT vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

NUGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NUGT
Direxion Daily Gold Miners Index Bull 2X ETF
0.44%0.22%1.79%1.67%0.70%0.00%0.00%0.63%0.57%

Frequently Asked Questions


NUGT and GLDM have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NUGT has higher volatility (35.11%) compared to GLDM (8.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUGT dropped -99.97% vs GLDM's -24.35%.

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 18.18% vs 17.04% for NUGT. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GLDM has been the lower-risk option at 8.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 18.18% return vs 17.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.13% for NUGT.

NUGT has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

NUGT tracks MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index (200%), while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.13% for NUGT and 0.10% for GLDM.

GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 vs 0.65), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NUGT and GLDM

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