PALL vs. DGZ
PALL (Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF) and DGZ (DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes) are both exchange-traded funds - PALL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Palladium London PM Fix ($/ozt), while DGZ is a Inverse Commodities fund tracking the Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PALL returned 7.79%/yr vs -7.12%/yr for DGZ. At a correlation of -0.32, they often move in opposite directions. PALL charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DGZ.
Performance
PALL vs. DGZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PALL achieves a -23.17% return, which is significantly lower than DGZ's 13.79% return. Over the past 10 years, PALL has outperformed DGZ with an annualized return of 7.79%, while DGZ has yielded a comparatively lower -7.12% annualized return.
PALL
- 1D
- -2.40%
- 1M
- -8.89%
- YTD
- -23.17%
- 6M
- -33.98%
- 1Y
- 13.76%
- 3Y*
- -1.99%
- 5Y*
- -14.70%
- 10Y*
- 7.79%
DGZ
- 1D
- 4.60%
- 1M
- 27.91%
- YTD
- 13.79%
- 6M
- 21.33%
- 1Y
- -7.69%
- 3Y*
- -14.24%
- 5Y*
- -9.28%
- 10Y*
- -7.12%
PALL vs. DGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PALL Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF | -23.17% | 74.07% | -17.38% | -38.77% | -6.28% | -23.26% | 25.27% | 53.94% | 17.23% | 55.73% |
DGZ DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes | 13.79% | -32.55% | -16.46% | -4.75% | 4.93% | 1.53% | -20.80% | -13.42% | 4.88% | -11.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between PALL and DGZ 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 | -0.21 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.27 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 14, 2010 | -0.32 |
The correlation between PALL and DGZ shifts across timeframes, from -0.32 (all time) to -0.21 (3 years), 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
PALL vs. DGZ — Risk / Return Rank
PALL
DGZ
PALL vs. DGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL) and DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ). 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.
| PALL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.05 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.34 | -0.20 | +0.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.75 | -0.35 | +1.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PALL vs. DGZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PALL drawdown since its inception was -73.63%, smaller than the maximum DGZ drawdown of -86.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALL and DGZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PALL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -73.63% | -86.32% | +12.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -40.70% | -38.32% | -2.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.70% | -59.54% | +18.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -73.63% | -61.54% | -12.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -73.63% | -71.49% | -2.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -62.14% | -80.51% | +18.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.91% | -57.80% | +30.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.39% | 22.24% | -3.85% |
Volatility
PALL vs. DGZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL) is 12.76%, while DB Gold Short Exchange Traded Notes (DGZ) has a volatility of 45.91%. This indicates that PALL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DGZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PALL | DGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.76% | 45.91% | -33.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 42.39% | 58.66% | -16.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 51.04% | 69.62% | -18.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 42.41% | 36.50% | +5.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 38.03% | 28.17% | +9.86% |
PALL vs. DGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
PALL has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than DGZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
PALL vs. DGZ - Dividend Comparison
Neither PALL nor DGZ has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
PALL and DGZ 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.
DGZ has higher volatility (45.91%) compared to PALL (12.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALL dropped -73.63% vs DGZ's -86.32%.
On 10-year performance, PALL leads with 7.79% vs -7.12% for DGZ. On fees, PALL is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PALL has been the lower-risk option at 12.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PALL has performed better with a 7.79% return vs -7.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PALL is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DGZ.
PALL and DGZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
PALL is categorized as Precious Metals, while DGZ is Inverse Commodities. PALL tracks Palladium London PM Fix ($/ozt), while DGZ tracks Deutsche Bank Liquid Commodity Index - Optimum Yield Gold Excess Return (-100%). They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALL and 0.75% for DGZ.
PALL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.27 vs -0.11), 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 PALL and DGZ
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