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

Performance

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T-Rex 2X Inverse NVIDIA Daily Target ETF (NVDQ) 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, NVDQ achieves a -36.13% return, which is significantly lower than GLDM's 3.00% return.


NVDQ

1D
7.09%
1M
-18.40%
YTD
-36.13%
6M
-41.91%
1Y
-68.82%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GLDM

1D
-0.96%
1M
-1.62%
YTD
3.00%
6M
5.60%
1Y
32.42%
3Y*
31.49%
5Y*
18.49%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
NVDQ
T-Rex 2X Inverse NVIDIA Daily Target ETF
-36.13%-74.63%-93.80%-30.70%
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
3.00%64.20%27.08%4.44%

Correlation

The correlation between NVDQ and GLDM is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2023

-0.04

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

NVDQ vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVDQ
NVDQ Risk / Return Rank: 11
Overall Rank
NVDQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NVDQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
NVDQ Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
NVDQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
Calmar Ratio Rank
NVDQ Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

GLDM
GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T-Rex 2X Inverse NVIDIA Daily Target ETF (NVDQ) 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.


NVDQGLDMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.80

1.25

-0.45

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.94

1.70

-2.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-1.42

4.23

-5.65

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVDQ Sharpe Ratio is -1.02, which is lower than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVDQ 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NVDQGLDMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.02

1.24

-2.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.89

1.02

-1.91

Drawdowns

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVDQ drawdown since its inception was -99.45%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVDQ and GLDM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NVDQGLDMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-99.45%

-21.63%

-77.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-73.67%

-19.14%

-54.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-99.35%

-17.65%

-81.70%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-88.21%

-6.22%

-81.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

48.57%

7.69%

+40.88%

Volatility

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

T-Rex 2X Inverse NVIDIA Daily Target ETF (NVDQ) has a higher volatility of 25.84% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 5.47%. This indicates that NVDQ'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


NVDQGLDMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

25.84%

5.47%

+20.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

51.78%

22.99%

+28.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

67.86%

26.39%

+41.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

95.52%

17.91%

+77.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

95.52%

16.85%

+78.67%

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

NVDQ has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

NVDQ vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

NVDQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.41%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
GLDM
SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NVDQ
T-Rex 2X Inverse NVIDIA Daily Target ETF
0.41%0.26%4.59%11.60%

Frequently Asked Questions


NVDQ and GLDM have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NVDQ has higher volatility (25.84%) compared to GLDM (5.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVDQ dropped -99.45% vs GLDM's -21.63%.

On 1-year performance, GLDM leads with 32.42% vs -68.82% for NVDQ. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GLDM has been the lower-risk option at 5.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 32.42% return vs -68.82%. 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 1.05% for NVDQ.

NVDQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.41%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

NVDQ is categorized as Inverse Equities, while GLDM is Gold. They also come from different issuers: T-Rex and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for NVDQ and 0.10% for GLDM.

GLDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs -1.02), 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 NVDQ 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