COAL vs. HAP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

COAL (Range Global Coal Index ETF) and HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - COAL tracks the VettaFi Global Coal Index while HAP tracks the MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, COAL returned 68.37% vs 46.66% for HAP. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. COAL charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for HAP.

Performance

COAL vs. HAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Range Global Coal Index ETF (COAL) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with COAL having a 21.77% return and HAP slightly lower at 21.49%.

COAL

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 8.24%
• YTD: 21.77%
• 6M: 24.50%
• 1Y: 68.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HAP

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 0.64%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 23.70%
• 1Y: 46.66%
• 3Y*: 18.93%
• 5Y*: 11.51%
• 10Y*: 11.99%

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

COAL vs. HAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
COAL Range Global Coal Index ETF	21.77%	12.65%	-16.01%
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF	21.49%	34.91%	0.77%

Correlation

The correlation between COAL and HAP is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.53

The correlation between COAL and HAP shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

COAL vs. HAP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	COAL	HAP
Energy	50.3%	32.3%
Basic Materials	43.2%	36.7%
Industrials	6.6%	10.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.5%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.4%
Technology	-	0.9%
Utilities	-	9.8%

Return for Risk

COAL vs. HAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

COAL

COAL Risk / Return Rank: 70
COAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
COAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
COAL Omega Ratio Rank: 63
COAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
COAL Martin Ratio Rank: 60

HAP

HAP Risk / Return Rank: 89
HAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
HAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HAP Omega Ratio Rank: 88
HAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
HAP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

COAL vs. HAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Range Global Coal Index ETF (COAL) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP). 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.

	COAL	HAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	3.14	-0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.15	4.01	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.56	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.46	5.65	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.51	23.05	-12.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COAL vs. HAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COAL Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the HAP Sharpe Ratio of 3.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COAL and HAP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	COAL	HAP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	3.14	-0.81
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	0.26	-0.03

Drawdowns

COAL vs. HAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COAL drawdown since its inception was -42.29%, smaller than the maximum HAP drawdown of -50.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COAL and HAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	COAL	HAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.29%	-50.73%	+8.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.42%	-8.31%	-7.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.92%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.66%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.20%	-1.95%	-0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.14%	-12.03%	-2.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.52%	2.03%	+4.49%

Volatility

COAL vs. HAP - Volatility Comparison

Range Global Coal Index ETF (COAL) has a higher volatility of 10.59% compared to VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) at 4.37%. This indicates that COAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COAL	HAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.59%	4.37%	+6.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.26%	12.24%	+9.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.39%	14.91%	+14.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.60%	18.24%	+9.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.60%	19.74%	+7.86%

COAL vs. HAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

COAL has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than HAP's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

COAL vs. HAP - Dividend Comparison

COAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.16%, more than HAP's 1.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COAL Range Global Coal Index ETF	2.16%	2.63%	1.80%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF	1.87%	2.27%	2.65%	3.27%	3.28%	2.16%	2.45%	2.80%	2.85%	2.02%	1.99%	3.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COAL and HAP in my portfolio?

COAL and HAP have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COAL or HAP?

COAL has higher volatility (10.59%) compared to HAP (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COAL dropped -42.29% vs HAP's -50.73%.

Which ETF is better, COAL or HAP?

On 1-year performance, COAL leads with 68.37% vs 46.66% for HAP. On fees, HAP is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, HAP has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COAL or HAP?

Over the 1-year period, COAL has performed better with a 68.37% return vs 46.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COAL or HAP?

HAP is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for COAL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COAL or HAP?

COAL has the higher dividend yield at 2.16%, compared with 1.87% for HAP.

What is the main difference between COAL and HAP?

COAL tracks VettaFi Global Coal Index, while HAP tracks MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for COAL and 0.42% for HAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.14 vs 2.34), 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.