ARKW vs. GDXJ
ARKW (ARK Next Generation Internet ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ARKW is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by ARK, while GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. ARKW is actively managed, while GDXJ is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ARKW returned 22.51%/yr vs 12.00%/yr for GDXJ. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ARKW charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for GDXJ.
Performance
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ARKW achieves a -4.37% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -8.37% return. Over the past 10 years, ARKW has outperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 22.51%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively lower 12.00% annualized return.
ARKW
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- -3.08%
- YTD
- -4.37%
- 6M
- -7.45%
- 1Y
- 10.46%
- 3Y*
- 36.42%
- 5Y*
- 0.46%
- 10Y*
- 22.51%
GDXJ
- 1D
- 3.15%
- 1M
- -19.14%
- YTD
- -8.37%
- 6M
- -6.68%
- 1Y
- 51.06%
- 3Y*
- 44.17%
- 5Y*
- 16.23%
- 10Y*
- 12.00%
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARKW ARK Next Generation Internet ETF | -4.37% | 38.93% | 42.27% | 96.89% | -67.49% | -18.85% | 157.44% | 35.76% | 4.24% | 87.29% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | -8.37% | 172.28% | 15.67% | 7.12% | -14.53% | -21.25% | 30.40% | 40.44% | -11.02% | 8.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between ARKW and GDXJ is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2014 | 0.19 |
The correlation between ARKW and GDXJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.19 (all time) to 0.35 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ARKW
GDXJ
Technology
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Technology
ARKW
GDXJ
-
Consumer Cyclical
ARKW
GDXJ
-
Communication Services
ARKW
GDXJ
-
Financial Services
ARKW
GDXJ
-
Industrials
ARKW
GDXJ
-
Basic Materials
ARKW
-
GDXJ
Consumer Defensive
ARKW
-
GDXJ
-
Energy
ARKW
-
GDXJ
-
Healthcare
ARKW
-
GDXJ
-
Real Estate
ARKW
-
GDXJ
-
Utilities
ARKW
-
GDXJ
-
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
ARKW vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank
ARKW
GDXJ
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ARK Next Generation Internet ETF (ARKW) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.
| ARKW | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.20 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.29 | 1.30 | -1.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.59 | 3.55 | -2.97 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ARKW drawdown since its inception was -80.52%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARKW and GDXJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ARKW | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.52% | -88.66% | +8.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.21% | -39.47% | +3.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -36.21% | -39.47% | +3.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -77.36% | -49.76% | -27.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -80.52% | -57.77% | -22.75% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.35% | -33.25% | +9.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.97% | -60.45% | +36.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.89% | 14.41% | +3.48% |
Volatility
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ARK Next Generation Internet ETF (ARKW) is 10.38%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 19.46%. This indicates that ARKW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ARKW | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.38% | 19.46% | -9.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.57% | 43.41% | -18.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.92% | 51.54% | -18.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.59% | 41.50% | +2.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.73% | 44.23% | -6.50% |
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ARKW has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
ARKW vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison
ARKW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, less than GDXJ's 2.54% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ARKW ARK Next Generation Internet ETF | 1.66% | 1.59% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.17% | 1.29% | 0.00% | 13.05% | 2.05% | 0.00% | 2.29% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | 2.54% | 2.33% | 2.61% | 0.72% | 0.51% | 1.78% | 1.58% | 0.39% | 0.45% | 0.03% | 4.78% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ARKW and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXJ has higher volatility (19.46%) compared to ARKW (10.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ARKW dropped -80.52% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.
On 10-year performance, ARKW leads with 22.51% vs 12.00% for GDXJ. On fees, GDXJ is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, ARKW has been the lower-risk option at 10.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ARKW has performed better with a 22.51% return vs 12.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDXJ is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for ARKW.
GDXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 1.66% for ARKW.
ARKW is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while GDXJ is Gold. They also come from different issuers: ARK and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for ARKW and 0.52% for GDXJ.
GDXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.00 vs 0.32), 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 ARKW and GDXJ
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