COPA vs. GNR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

COPA (Themes Copper Miners ETF) and GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - COPA is a Copper fund tracking the BITA Global Copper Mining Select Index, while GNR is a Natural Resources fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, COPA returned 114.93% vs 30.88% for GNR. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. COPA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GNR.

Performance

COPA vs. GNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Copper Miners ETF (COPA) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COPA achieves a 22.04% return, which is significantly higher than GNR's 13.01% return.

COPA

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 6.15%
• YTD: 22.04%
• 6M: 25.51%
• 1Y: 114.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GNR

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: -4.82%
• YTD: 13.01%
• 6M: 13.19%
• 1Y: 30.88%
• 3Y*: 13.46%
• 5Y*: 9.38%
• 10Y*: 10.52%

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

COPA vs. GNR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
COPA Themes Copper Miners ETF	22.04%	100.86%	-13.18%
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	13.01%	28.68%	-9.12%

Correlation

The correlation between COPA and GNR is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2024	0.70

The correlation between COPA and GNR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

COPA vs. GNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

COPA

COPA Risk / Return Rank: 77
COPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
COPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
COPA Omega Ratio Rank: 72
COPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
COPA Martin Ratio Rank: 73

GNR

GNR Risk / Return Rank: 62
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 53
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

COPA vs. GNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Copper Miners ETF (COPA) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). 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.

	COPA	GNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	1.80	+1.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.09	2.38	+0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.32	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.12	3.89	+0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.41	13.28	+0.13

COPA vs. GNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COPA Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is higher than the GNR Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COPA and GNR, 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

COPA vs. GNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COPA drawdown since its inception was -34.72%, smaller than the maximum GNR drawdown of -51.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COPA and GNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	COPA	GNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.72%	-51.37%	+16.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.05%	-7.97%	-20.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.15%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.66%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-48.59%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.52%	-7.46%	+1.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.54%	-14.92%	+5.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.60%	2.33%	+6.27%

Volatility

COPA vs. GNR - Volatility Comparison

Themes Copper Miners ETF (COPA) has a higher volatility of 15.99% compared to SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) at 5.73%. This indicates that COPA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COPA	GNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.99%	5.73%	+10.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.47%	13.97%	+21.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	41.17%	17.24%	+23.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.97%	20.26%	+18.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.97%	21.89%	+17.08%

COPA vs. GNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

COPA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GNR's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

COPA vs. GNR - Dividend Comparison

COPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.49%, more than GNR's 2.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COPA Themes Copper Miners ETF	3.49%	4.26%	1.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	2.63%	2.76%	4.73%	3.37%	4.37%	3.44%	2.78%	3.84%	3.51%	2.40%	2.06%	4.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COPA and GNR in my portfolio?

COPA and GNR have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COPA or GNR?

COPA has higher volatility (15.99%) compared to GNR (5.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COPA dropped -34.72% vs GNR's -51.37%.

Which ETF is better, COPA or GNR?

On 1-year performance, COPA leads with 114.93% vs 30.88% for GNR. On fees, COPA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 5.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, COPA or GNR?

Over the 1-year period, COPA has performed better with a 114.93% return vs 30.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, COPA or GNR?

COPA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, COPA or GNR?

COPA has the higher dividend yield at 3.49%, compared with 2.63% for GNR.

What is the main difference between COPA and GNR?

COPA is categorized as Copper, while GNR is Natural Resources. COPA tracks BITA Global Copper Mining Select Index, while GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: Themes and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for COPA and 0.40% for GNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 1.80), 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.