GNR vs VYM
State Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, GNR or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. GNR led over 1Y and 5Y, VYM over 3Y and the full window. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 34.5%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GNR | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $5.1B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.52% | 2.24% |
| Holdings | 112 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +26.06%Best | +14.82% |
| 1Y Return | +40.66%Best | +20.84% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.71% | +18.64%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.55%Best | +12.28% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.6% | 12.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -60.6% | -35.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,060Best | $17,845 |
| Top 10 Weight | 34.5% | 25.9%Best |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Sep 13, 2010 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 14, 2010 to Sep 4, 2026 (16 years).
GNR vs VYM growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 16 years both funds cover.
GNR vs VYM Performance
State Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GNR returned +40.66% while VYM returned +20.84%. Year to date, GNR is up 26.06% versus a gain of 14.82% for VYM.
Over three years, GNR compounded at +15.71% per year against +18.64% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.55% and +12.28% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +10.58% annualized vs +4.12%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GNR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% compared with 12.9% for VYM. 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 -35.7% for VYM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GNR charges 0.40% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $4 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GNR currently yields 2.52% against 2.24% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
27.4% of GNR's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 8.1% of VYM's money is in holdings GNR also owns.
GNR and VYM share little of their money.
31 positions in common, counted across the 92 positions we hold weights for in GNR and 603 in VYM, against full books of 112 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 539 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for GNR (89.4% of the fund), and 13 for GNR that do not appear in VYM (17.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GNR | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 4.58% | 2.36% | 2.22% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 2.50% | 1.28% | 1.22% |
| NEMNewmont Corp Common | 2.95% | 0.41% | 2.54% |
| ADMArcher-Daniels-Midland Co. | 1.93% | 0.15% | 1.78% |
| NUENucor Corp. | 1.49% | 0.20% | 1.29% |
| COPConocophillips Common Stock USD 0.01 | 1.03% | 0.53% | 0.50% |
| PKGPackaging Corp. Of America | 1.20% | 0.09% | 1.11% |
| AMCRAmcor Plc Ordinary Shares | 1.16% | 0.08% | 1.08% |
| IPInternational Paper Co. | 1.15% | 0.08% | 1.07% |
| CFCf Industries Holdings Inc. | 0.94% | 0.07% | 0.87% |
27.4% of GNR is already inside VYM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GNR or VYM?
GNR has an expense ratio of 0.40% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GNR or VYM?
Over the past year GNR returned +40.66% vs +20.84% for VYM, so GNR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GNR annualized +4.12% vs +10.58% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GNR or VYM?
GNR has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 12.9% for VYM. Worst drawdown: GNR -60.6% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both GNR and VYM?
GNR and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GNR and VYM?
27.4% of GNR's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 8.1% of VYM's is in holdings GNR also owns. They hold 31 positions in common, counted across the 92 positions we hold weights for in GNR and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, GNR or VYM?
GNR yields 2.52% while VYM yields 2.24%, so GNR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than GNR?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. GNR led over 1Y and 5Y, VYM over 3Y and the full window. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 34.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.