GDX vs. MAGS

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

GDX (VanEck Gold Miners ETF) and MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDX is a Gold fund tracking the NYSE MarketVector Global Gold Miners Index, while MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. GDX is passively managed, while MAGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GDX returned 37.89%/yr vs 33.16%/yr for MAGS. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDX charges 0.51%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for MAGS.

Performance

GDX vs. MAGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDX achieves a -8.28% return, which is significantly lower than MAGS's 0.86% return.

GDX

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: -16.83%
• YTD: -8.28%
• 6M: 0.10%
• 1Y: 53.51%
• 3Y*: 37.89%
• 5Y*: 17.28%
• 10Y*: 12.82%

MAGS

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: -4.44%
• YTD: 0.86%
• 6M: 0.73%
• 1Y: 28.10%
• 3Y*: 33.16%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GDX vs. MAGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF	-8.28%	154.77%	10.63%	-8.85%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	0.86%	22.99%	63.97%	37.32%

Correlation

The correlation between GDX and MAGS is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2023	0.15

GDX vs. MAGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GDX	MAGS
Basic Materials	100.0%	-
Communication Services	-	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	15.3%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GDX vs. MAGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDX

GDX Risk / Return Rank: 35
GDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
GDX Omega Ratio Rank: 37
GDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
GDX Martin Ratio Rank: 32

MAGS

MAGS Risk / Return Rank: 39
MAGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
MAGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
MAGS Omega Ratio Rank: 41
MAGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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.

GDX vs. MAGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). 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.

	GDX	MAGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.16	1.40	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	1.93	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.24	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.68	1.52	+0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.32	5.22	-0.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GDX vs. MAGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDX Sharpe Ratio is 1.16, which is comparable to the MAGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDX and MAGS, 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

	GDX	MAGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.16	1.40	-0.24
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.35	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.12	1.49	-1.37

Drawdowns

GDX vs. MAGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDX drawdown since its inception was -80.34%, which is greater than MAGS's maximum drawdown of -29.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDX and MAGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDX	MAGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.34%	-29.91%	-50.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-32.09%	-18.62%	-13.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.09%	-29.91%	-2.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.51%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.09%	-6.22%	-25.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.43%	-4.70%	-35.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.42%	5.40%	+7.02%

Volatility

GDX vs. MAGS - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX) has a higher volatility of 16.05% compared to Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) at 5.89%. This indicates that GDX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MAGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDX	MAGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.05%	5.89%	+10.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.61%	14.84%	+23.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	46.36%	20.22%	+26.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.61%	25.99%	+10.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.27%	25.99%	+11.28%

GDX vs. MAGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDX has a 0.51% expense ratio, which is higher than MAGS's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDX vs. MAGS - Dividend Comparison

GDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, less than MAGS's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF	0.80%	0.74%	1.19%	1.61%	1.66%	1.67%	0.53%	0.67%	0.50%	0.76%	0.26%	0.85%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	1.47%	1.48%	0.81%	0.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDX and MAGS in my portfolio?

GDX and MAGS have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDX or MAGS?

GDX has higher volatility (16.05%) compared to MAGS (5.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDX dropped -80.34% vs MAGS's -29.91%.

Which ETF is better, GDX or MAGS?

On 3-year performance, GDX leads with 37.89% vs 33.16% for MAGS. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDX or MAGS?

Over the 3-year period, GDX has performed better with a 37.89% return vs 33.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDX or MAGS?

MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.51% for GDX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GDX or MAGS?

MAGS has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 0.80% for GDX.

What is the main difference between GDX and MAGS?

GDX is categorized as Gold, while MAGS is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.51% for GDX and 0.29% for MAGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 1.16), 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.