AUMI vs. VGT

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

AUMI (Themes Gold Miners ETF) and VGT (Vanguard Information Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AUMI is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index, while VGT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Information Technology 25/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, AUMI returned 38.38% vs 47.99% for VGT. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AUMI charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for VGT.

Performance

AUMI vs. VGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUMI achieves a -11.62% return, which is significantly lower than VGT's 24.03% return.

AUMI

• 1D: 2.52%
• 1M: -18.86%
• YTD: -11.62%
• 6M: -9.97%
• 1Y: 38.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VGT

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 2.90%
• YTD: 24.03%
• 6M: 24.13%
• 1Y: 47.99%
• 3Y*: 29.84%
• 5Y*: 20.35%
• 10Y*: 25.19%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AUMI vs. VGT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AUMI Themes Gold Miners ETF	-11.62%	164.18%	30.61%	10.23%
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF	24.03%	21.77%	29.30%	2.38%

Correlation

The correlation between AUMI and VGT is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2023	0.24

AUMI vs. VGT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AUMI	VGT
Basic Materials	99.4%	0.0%
Communication Services	0.1%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	0.3%
Financial Services	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	0.0%
Industrials	-	0.4%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	98.5%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AUMI vs. VGT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AUMI

AUMI Risk / Return Rank: 25
AUMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
AUMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
AUMI Omega Ratio Rank: 28
AUMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
AUMI Martin Ratio Rank: 24

VGT

VGT Risk / Return Rank: 70
VGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
VGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
VGT Omega Ratio Rank: 72
VGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
VGT Martin Ratio Rank: 59

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AUMI vs. VGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). 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.

	AUMI	VGT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.78	2.19	-1.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.24	2.74	-1.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.36	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.98	2.94	-1.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.81	9.11	-6.30

AUMI vs. VGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUMI Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is lower than the VGT Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUMI and VGT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AUMI vs. VGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUMI drawdown since its inception was -39.28%, smaller than the maximum VGT drawdown of -54.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUMI and VGT.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUMI	VGT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.28%	-54.63%	+15.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.28%	-16.40%	-22.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.23%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.07%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.51%	-7.18%	-26.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.35%	-7.95%	+0.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.72%	5.28%	+8.44%

Volatility

AUMI vs. VGT - Volatility Comparison

Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) has a higher volatility of 17.47% compared to Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) at 10.00%. This indicates that AUMI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUMI	VGT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.47%	10.00%	+7.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.45%	18.00%	+22.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.48%	22.00%	+27.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	42.24%	25.40%	+16.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.24%	24.72%	+17.52%

AUMI vs. VGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUMI has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than VGT's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

AUMI vs. VGT - Dividend Comparison

AUMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, more than VGT's 0.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AUMI Themes Gold Miners ETF	0.98%	0.86%	1.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF	0.33%	0.40%	0.60%	0.65%	0.91%	0.64%	0.82%	1.11%	1.29%	0.99%	1.31%	1.28%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUMI and VGT in my portfolio?

AUMI and VGT have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AUMI or VGT?

AUMI has higher volatility (17.47%) compared to VGT (10.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUMI dropped -39.28% vs VGT's -54.63%.

Which ETF is better, AUMI or VGT?

On 1-year performance, VGT leads with 47.99% vs 38.38% for AUMI. On fees, VGT is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, VGT has been the lower-risk option at 10.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUMI or VGT?

Over the 1-year period, VGT has performed better with a 47.99% return vs 38.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUMI or VGT?

VGT is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for AUMI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUMI or VGT?

AUMI has the higher dividend yield at 0.98%, compared with 0.33% for VGT.

What is the main difference between AUMI and VGT?

AUMI is categorized as Gold, while VGT is Technology Equities. AUMI tracks Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index, while VGT tracks MSCI USA IMI Information Technology 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Themes and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for AUMI and 0.09% for VGT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 0.78), 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.