RING vs. GLL
RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) and GLL (ProShares UltraShort Gold) are both exchange-traded funds - RING is a Gold fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index, while GLL is a Leveraged Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Gold (-200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RING returned 11.09%/yr vs -20.73%/yr for GLL. At a correlation of -0.77, they often move in opposite directions. RING charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for GLL.
Performance
RING vs. GLL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RING achieves a -13.45% return, which is significantly lower than GLL's 3.86% return. Over the past 10 years, RING has outperformed GLL with an annualized return of 11.09%, while GLL has yielded a comparatively lower -20.73% annualized return.
RING
- 1D
- -2.53%
- 1M
- -8.38%
- 6M
- -22.60%
- YTD
- -13.45%
- 1Y
- 45.11%
- 3Y*
- 38.89%
- 5Y*
- 19.27%
- 10Y*
- 11.09%
GLL
- 1D
- 5.23%
- 1M
- 9.87%
- 6M
- 18.09%
- YTD
- 3.86%
- 1Y
- -37.13%
- 3Y*
- -37.68%
- 5Y*
- -26.90%
- 10Y*
- -20.73%
RING vs. GLL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | -13.45% | 164.72% | 15.98% | 12.29% | -15.40% | -7.46% | 24.98% | 49.92% | -13.14% | 10.24% |
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 3.86% | -62.81% | -33.33% | -14.91% | -2.12% | 1.66% | -41.47% | -26.95% | 5.39% | -23.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between RING and GLL is -0.81, 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 | -0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.79 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2012 | -0.77 |
The correlation between RING and GLL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.81 to -0.77 - 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
RING vs. GLL — Risk / Return Rank
RING
GLL
RING vs. GLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) 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.
| RING | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 0.90 | +0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.26 | -0.57 | +1.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.93 | -0.84 | +3.77 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RING vs. GLL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RING drawdown since its inception was -79.47%, smaller than the maximum GLL drawdown of -99.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RING and GLL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RING | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.47% | -99.24% | +19.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -35.91% | -65.10% | +29.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.91% | -87.95% | +52.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.94% | -89.76% | +41.82% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.04% | -95.76% | +43.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -35.90% | -98.71% | +62.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -47.28% | -85.19% | +37.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.46% | 44.14% | -28.68% |
Volatility
RING vs. GLL - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) and ProShares UltraShort Gold (GLL) have volatilities of 14.58% and 15.04%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RING | GLL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.58% | 15.04% | -0.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 39.61% | 46.46% | -6.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 48.36% | 55.09% | -6.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.11% | 36.69% | +0.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.71% | 32.42% | +4.29% |
RING vs. GLL - Expense Ratio Comparison
RING has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than GLL's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
RING vs. GLL - Dividend Comparison
RING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, while GLL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLL ProShares UltraShort Gold | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF | 1.43% | 0.84% | 1.43% | 2.01% | 2.29% | 2.38% | 0.83% | 0.83% | 0.70% | 0.42% | 1.41% | 0.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RING and GLL have a correlation of -0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLL has higher volatility (15.04%) compared to RING (14.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RING dropped -79.47% vs GLL's -99.24%.
On 10-year performance, RING leads with 11.09% vs -20.73% for GLL. On fees, RING is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RING has been the lower-risk option at 14.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, RING has performed better with a 11.09% return vs -20.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RING is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for GLL.
RING has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.00% for GLL.
RING is categorized as Gold, while GLL is Leveraged Commodities. RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index, while GLL tracks Bloomberg Gold (-200%). They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RING and 0.95% for GLL.
RING currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.94 vs -0.68), 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 RING 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