GNR vs QQQ
State Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. GNR delivered stronger 1-year returns. GNR offers more diversification with 112 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GNR | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $4.9B | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.52% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 112 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +26.80% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +44.16% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.16% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.30% | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.7% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.6% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 13, 2010 | Mar 10, 1999 |
GNR vs QQQ Performance
State Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GNR returned +44.16% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, GNR is up 26.80% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, GNR compounded at +17.16% per year against +25.96% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.30% and +14.54% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.03% annualized vs +4.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 19.7% for GNR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -60.6% for GNR and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.51. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GNR charges 0.40% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $18 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GNR currently yields 2.52% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GNR or QQQ?
GNR has an expense ratio of 0.40% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $22 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GNR or QQQ?
Over the past year GNR returned +44.16% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so GNR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GNR annualized +4.17% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GNR or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 19.7% for GNR. Worst drawdown: GNR -60.6% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both GNR and QQQ?
GNR and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.51, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GNR and QQQ?
GNR and QQQ share 2 common holdings with a 0.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 191 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GNR or QQQ?
GNR yields 2.52% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so GNR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.