G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE
G2XJ.DE (VanEck Junior Gold Miners UCITS) and QUTM.DE (VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - G2XJ.DE is a Precious Metals fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners, while QUTM.DE is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MarketVector™ Global Quantum Leaders Total Return Net Index (MVQTMLTR). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, G2XJ.DE returned 60.21% vs 59.55% for QUTM.DE. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.55% expense ratio.
Performance
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, G2XJ.DE achieves a -3.74% return, which is significantly lower than QUTM.DE's 33.86% return.
G2XJ.DE
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- -7.94%
- YTD
- -3.74%
- 6M
- 7.08%
- 1Y
- 60.21%
- 3Y*
- 42.43%
- 5Y*
- 18.76%
- 10Y*
- 12.60%
QUTM.DE
- 1D
- -1.49%
- 1M
- 15.40%
- YTD
- 33.86%
- 6M
- 29.52%
- 1Y
- 59.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
G2XJ.DE VanEck Junior Gold Miners UCITS | -3.74% | 79.51% |
QUTM.DE VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc | 33.86% | 14.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between G2XJ.DE and QUTM.DE is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2025 | 0.27 |
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
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE — Risk / Return Rank
G2XJ.DE
QUTM.DE
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Junior Gold Miners UCITS (G2XJ.DE) and VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QUTM.DE). 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.
| G2XJ.DE | QUTM.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.32 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.11 | 2.48 | -0.38 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.07 | 5.81 | -0.74 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| G2XJ.DE | QUTM.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33 | 1.95 | -0.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.39 | 1.71 | -1.32 |
Drawdowns
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum G2XJ.DE drawdown since its inception was -49.96%, which is greater than QUTM.DE's maximum drawdown of -23.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for G2XJ.DE and QUTM.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| G2XJ.DE | QUTM.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -49.96% | -23.74% | -26.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.24% | -23.74% | -5.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.24% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.82% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -49.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.97% | -3.42% | -22.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.26% | -7.71% | -17.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.16% | 10.15% | +2.01% |
Volatility
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Junior Gold Miners UCITS (G2XJ.DE) has a higher volatility of 15.07% compared to VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF A USD Acc (QUTM.DE) at 12.36%. This indicates that G2XJ.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QUTM.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| G2XJ.DE | QUTM.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.07% | 12.36% | +2.71% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 38.04% | 20.92% | +17.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 46.48% | 30.14% | +16.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.98% | 30.16% | +6.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 37.69% | 30.16% | +7.53% |
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both G2XJ.DE and QUTM.DE have an expense ratio of 0.55%.
Dividends
G2XJ.DE vs. QUTM.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither G2XJ.DE nor QUTM.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
G2XJ.DE and QUTM.DE have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.55% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
G2XJ.DE and QUTM.DE have the same expense ratio: 0.55% per year.
G2XJ.DE is categorized as Precious Metals, while QUTM.DE is Technology Equities. G2XJ.DE tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners, while QUTM.DE tracks MarketVector™ Global Quantum Leaders Total Return Net Index (MVQTMLTR).
Find the right allocation for G2XJ.DE and QUTM.DE
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