FXI vs. GDX
FXI (iShares China Large-Cap ETF) and GDX (VanEck Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FXI is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China 50 Index, while GDX is a Gold fund tracking the NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FXI returned 3.13%/yr vs 13.29%/yr for GDX. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FXI charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.51%/yr for GDX.
Performance
FXI vs. GDX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXI achieves a -7.83% return, which is significantly lower than GDX's -6.69% return. Over the past 10 years, FXI has underperformed GDX with an annualized return of 3.13%, while GDX has yielded a comparatively higher 13.29% annualized return.
FXI
- 1D
- 1.09%
- 1M
- -7.76%
- YTD
- -7.83%
- 6M
- -8.72%
- 1Y
- -2.91%
- 3Y*
- 10.41%
- 5Y*
- -3.08%
- 10Y*
- 3.13%
GDX
- 1D
- 2.97%
- 1M
- -16.83%
- YTD
- -6.69%
- 6M
- -5.89%
- 1Y
- 50.59%
- 3Y*
- 38.96%
- 5Y*
- 17.51%
- 10Y*
- 13.29%
FXI vs. GDX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXI iShares China Large-Cap ETF | -7.83% | 28.95% | 28.98% | -12.42% | -20.66% | -20.06% | 8.92% | 14.90% | -13.28% | 36.26% |
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF | -6.69% | 154.77% | 10.63% | 9.98% | -9.01% | -9.52% | 23.66% | 39.84% | -8.77% | 11.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXI and GDX is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2006 | 0.25 |
The correlation between FXI and GDX shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (10 years) to 0.36 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FXI vs. GDX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FXI
GDX
Financial Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Technology
-
Energy
-
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
FXI
GDX
-
Consumer Cyclical
FXI
GDX
-
Communication Services
FXI
GDX
-
Technology
FXI
GDX
-
Energy
FXI
GDX
-
Industrials
FXI
GDX
-
Basic Materials
FXI
GDX
Healthcare
FXI
GDX
-
Real Estate
FXI
GDX
-
Consumer Defensive
FXI
GDX
-
Utilities
FXI
GDX
-
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
FXI vs. GDX — Risk / Return Rank
FXI
GDX
FXI vs. GDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI) and VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX). 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.
| FXI | GDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.58 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.99 | 1.21 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 1.40 | -1.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.38 | 3.87 | -4.25 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FXI vs. GDX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXI drawdown since its inception was -72.68%, smaller than the maximum GDX drawdown of -80.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXI and GDX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXI | GDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -72.68% | -80.34% | +7.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.03% | -36.28% | +20.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.72% | -36.28% | +7.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -54.94% | -46.51% | -8.43% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -60.81% | -49.79% | -11.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.42% | -30.91% | +3.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.21% | -40.41% | +9.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.66% | 13.11% | -5.45% |
Volatility
FXI vs. GDX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China Large-Cap ETF (FXI) is 6.22%, while VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) has a volatility of 17.20%. This indicates that FXI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FXI | GDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.22% | 17.20% | -10.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.30% | 39.15% | -24.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.90% | 46.89% | -26.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.67% | 36.74% | -5.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.64% | 37.34% | -9.70% |
FXI vs. GDX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXI has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than GDX's 0.51% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXI vs. GDX - Dividend Comparison
FXI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, more than GDX's 0.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXI iShares China Large-Cap ETF | 2.62% | 2.42% | 1.76% | 3.17% | 2.61% | 1.60% | 2.19% | 2.74% | 2.69% | 2.31% | 2.69% | 2.90% |
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF | 0.79% | 0.74% | 1.19% | 1.61% | 1.66% | 1.67% | 0.53% | 0.67% | 0.50% | 0.76% | 0.26% | 0.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXI and GDX have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDX has higher volatility (17.20%) compared to FXI (6.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FXI dropped -72.68% vs GDX's -80.34%.
On 10-year performance, GDX leads with 13.29% vs 3.13% for FXI. On fees, GDX is cheaper at 0.51% per year. On volatility, FXI has been the lower-risk option at 6.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GDX has performed better with a 13.29% return vs 3.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDX is cheaper with a 0.51% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FXI.
FXI has the higher dividend yield at 2.62%, compared with 0.79% for GDX.
FXI is categorized as China Equities, while GDX is Gold. FXI tracks FTSE China 50 Index, while GDX tracks NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FXI and 0.51% for GDX.
GDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs -0.15), 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 FXI and GDX
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