PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CNXT vs. GDXJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

CNXT vs. GDXJ

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ).

CNXT and GDXJ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CNXT is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the SME-ChiNext 100 Index. It was launched on Jul 24, 2014. GDXJ is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. It was launched on Nov 10, 2009. Both CNXT and GDXJ are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF		3.20%59.31%12.42%-21.47%-35.58%8.78%63.30%42.66%-39.48%20.19%
GDXJ
VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF		10.08%172.28%15.67%7.12%-14.53%-21.25%30.40%40.44%-11.02%8.22%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNXT achieves a 3.20% return, which is significantly lower than GDXJ's 10.08% return. Over the past 10 years, CNXT has underperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 3.87%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively higher 17.88% annualized return.

CNXT

1D
-0.62%
1M
-2.00%
YTD
3.20%
6M
2.49%
1Y
65.33%
3Y*
12.24%
5Y*
1.47%
10Y*
3.87%

GDXJ

1D
4.34%
1M
-19.21%
YTD
10.08%
6M
28.26%
1Y
125.16%
3Y*
49.66%
5Y*
23.75%
10Y*
17.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF

VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF

Often compared with CNXT:
CNXT vs. KSTRCNXT vs. ECNSCNXT vs. CXSECNXT vs. FXICNXT vs. VOOCNXT vs. VUGCNXT vs. YINN
Often compared with GDXJ:
GDXJ vs. GDXGDXJ vs. GLDGDXJ vs. SILJGDXJ vs. GOLDGDXJ vs. SPYGDXJ vs. GLDMGDXJ vs. IAU

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNXT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than GDXJ's 0.54% expense ratio.

CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF
GDXJ
VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF

Return for Risk

CNXT vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CNXT
CNXT Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
CNXT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNXT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNXT Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
CNXT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNXT Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
GDXJ
GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) and VanEck Vectors 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.

CNXTGDXJDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.06

2.47

-0.41

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.57

2.63

-0.06

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.38

-0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.71

3.77

-0.05

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.62

13.05

+0.57

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNXT Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNXT and GDXJ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CNXTGDXJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.06

2.47

-0.41

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

0.59

-0.55

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.12

0.40

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.08

+0.09

Correlation

The correlation between CNXT and GDXJ is 0.15, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison

CNXT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, less than GDXJ's 2.12% yield.

TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNXT
VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF		0.17%0.18%0.15%0.00%0.00%9.22%0.01%0.45%0.00%0.19%0.00%0.00%
GDXJ
VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF		2.12%2.33%2.61%0.72%0.51%1.78%1.58%0.39%0.45%0.03%4.78%0.72%

Drawdowns

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNXT drawdown since its inception was -68.98%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNXT and GDXJ.

Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators

CNXTGDXJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-68.98%

-88.66%

+19.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.35%

-32.92%

+15.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.21%

-51.76%

-9.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-63.30%

-57.77%

-5.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-24.37%

-19.81%

-4.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-43.41%

-60.90%

+17.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.73%

9.51%

-4.78%

Volatility

CNXT vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC SME-ChiNext ETF (CNXT) is 7.46%, while VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 19.46%. This indicates that CNXT 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 graphics...

Volatility by Period

CNXTGDXJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.46%

19.46%

-12.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.80%

42.52%

-22.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.89%

50.91%

-19.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

34.92%

40.57%

-5.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.54%

44.46%

-12.92%