GNT vs IVV
GAMCO Natural Resources Gold & Income Trust vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GNT or IVV?
Each has led over a different period.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GNT led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, IVV over the full window. GNT is less concentrated, with 30.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | GNT | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.18% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $183M | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 8.09% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 281 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +30.40%Best | +13.39% |
| 1Y Return | +45.37%Best | +20.08% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +31.46%Best | +21.29% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +19.99%Best | +12.88% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.6% | 14.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -88.1% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $24,873Best | $18,327 |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.1%Best | 37.9% |
| Fund Family | Gabelli Funds | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jan 27, 2011 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 27, 2011 to Sep 4, 2026 (15.6 years).
GNT vs IVV 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 15.6 years both funds cover.
GNT vs IVV Performance
GAMCO Natural Resources Gold & Income Trust (GNT) is an ETF from Gabelli Funds and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GNT returned +45.37% while IVV returned +20.08%. Year to date, GNT is up 30.40% versus a gain of 13.39% for IVV.
Over three years, GNT compounded at +31.46% per year against +21.29% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +19.99% and +12.88% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.64% annualized vs -2.36%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GNT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.6% compared with 14.2% for IVV. 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 -88.1% for GNT and -33.9% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.56. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GNT charges 1.18% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $118 vs $3 annually, a gap of $115 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GNT currently yields 8.09% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
41.7% of GNT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 3.9% of IVV's money is in holdings GNT also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 127 days apart, GNT as of Mar 31, 2026 and IVV as of Aug 5, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
29 positions in common, counted across the 88 positions we hold weights for in GNT and 505 in IVV, against full books of 281 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 468 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for GNT (95.5% of the fund), and 15 for GNT that do not appear in IVV (13.6%).
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 GNT | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 4.15% | 0.94% | 3.21% |
| NEMNewmont Corp Common | 4.71% | 0.17% | 4.54% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 2.68% | 0.52% | 2.16% |
| DEDeere & Co Sedol 2261203 | 2.96% | 0.23% | 2.73% |
| FCXFreeport-mcmoran Copper & Gold Inc. | 2.95% | 0.15% | 2.80% |
| CTVACorteva Inc Ctva | 2.38% | 0.08% | 2.30% |
| ADMArcher-Daniels-Midland Co. | 2.22% | 0.06% | 2.16% |
| CFCf Industries Holdings Inc. | 1.83% | 0.03% | 1.80% |
| TSNTyson Foods Inc. Class A | 1.68% | 0.02% | 1.66% |
| ZTSZoetis Inc, Class A | 1.53% | 0.05% | 1.48% |
41.7% of GNT is already inside IVV.
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, GNT or IVV?
GNT has an expense ratio of 1.18% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $115 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GNT or IVV?
Over the past year GNT returned +45.37% vs +20.08% for IVV, so GNT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GNT annualized -2.36% vs +12.64% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GNT or IVV?
GNT has been the more volatile fund at 22.6% annualized versus 14.2% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GNT -88.1% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both GNT and IVV?
GNT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.56, 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 GNT and IVV?
41.7% of GNT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 3.9% of IVV's is in holdings GNT also owns. They hold 29 positions in common, counted across the 88 positions we hold weights for in GNT and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, GNT or IVV?
GNT yields 8.09% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GNT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than GNT?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GNT led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, IVV over the full window. GNT is less concentrated, with 30.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.