GLIN vs. MOAT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GLIN (VanEck Vectors India Growth Leaders ETF) and MOAT (VanEck Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GLIN is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MarketGrader India All-Cap Growth Leaders Index, while MOAT is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GLIN returned 2.09%/yr vs 13.37%/yr for MOAT. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GLIN charges 0.82%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for MOAT.

Performance

GLIN vs. MOAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors India Growth Leaders ETF (GLIN) and VanEck Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLIN achieves a -3.75% return, which is significantly lower than MOAT's -0.94% return. Over the past 10 years, GLIN has underperformed MOAT with an annualized return of 2.09%, while MOAT has yielded a comparatively higher 13.37% annualized return.

GLIN

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: -0.07%
• YTD: -3.75%
• 6M: -1.14%
• 1Y: -4.43%
• 3Y*: 10.32%
• 5Y*: 4.57%
• 10Y*: 2.09%

MOAT

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: 3.30%
• YTD: -0.94%
• 6M: -0.69%
• 1Y: 14.97%
• 3Y*: 11.34%
• 5Y*: 8.01%
• 10Y*: 13.37%

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

GLIN vs. MOAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLIN VanEck Vectors India Growth Leaders ETF	-3.75%	-5.47%	15.64%	36.13%	-21.46%	29.57%	-0.29%	-21.49%	-37.41%	66.53%
MOAT VanEck Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF	-0.94%	13.20%	10.73%	31.89%	-13.66%	24.12%	14.84%	34.79%	-1.28%	23.18%

Correlation

The correlation between GLIN and MOAT is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 26, 2012	0.44

The correlation between GLIN and MOAT shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (1 year) to 0.44 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GLIN vs. MOAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GLIN	MOAT
Financial Services	35.5%	6.7%
Industrials	20.5%	13.5%
Consumer Cyclical	14.2%	10.3%
Basic Materials	8.7%	-
Healthcare	8.4%	16.0%
Communication Services	5.2%	2.4%
Utilities	3.5%	-
Energy	2.3%	-
Technology	1.9%	32.8%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	17.5%
Real Estate	0.0%	0.8%

Return for Risk

GLIN vs. MOAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLIN

GLIN Risk / Return Rank: 6
GLIN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
GLIN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
GLIN Omega Ratio Rank: 6
GLIN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
GLIN Martin Ratio Rank: 5

MOAT

MOAT Risk / Return Rank: 27
MOAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
MOAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
MOAT Omega Ratio Rank: 27
MOAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
MOAT Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

GLIN vs. MOAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors India Growth Leaders ETF (GLIN) and VanEck Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT). 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.

	GLIN	MOAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.26	1.09	-1.34
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.25	1.64	-1.89
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.19	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.24	1.21	-1.45
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.71	3.77	-4.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GLIN vs. MOAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLIN Sharpe Ratio is -0.26, which is lower than the MOAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLIN and MOAT, 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

	GLIN	MOAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.26	1.09	-1.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25	0.44	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.09	0.72	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.09	0.77	-0.87

Drawdowns

GLIN vs. MOAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLIN drawdown since its inception was -79.36%, which is greater than MOAT's maximum drawdown of -33.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLIN and MOAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLIN	MOAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.36%	-33.31%	-46.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.56%	-12.43%	-6.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.77%	-21.44%	-5.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.97%	-23.96%	-7.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-74.80%	-33.31%	-41.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-45.29%	-4.72%	-40.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-50.97%	-3.83%	-47.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.28%	3.98%	+2.30%

Volatility

GLIN vs. MOAT - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors India Growth Leaders ETF (GLIN) has a higher volatility of 6.70% compared to VanEck Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) at 3.82%. This indicates that GLIN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MOAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLIN	MOAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.70%	3.82%	+2.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.21%	9.87%	+5.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.48%	13.86%	+3.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.18%	18.18%	0.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.68%	18.68%	+5.00%

GLIN vs. MOAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLIN has a 0.82% expense ratio, which is higher than MOAT's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLIN vs. MOAT - Dividend Comparison

GLIN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than MOAT's 1.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLIN VanEck Vectors India Growth Leaders ETF	0.88%	0.84%	3.58%	0.96%	1.70%	0.00%	0.24%	1.42%	0.12%	0.10%	1.39%	3.11%
MOAT VanEck Vectors Morningstar Wide Moat ETF	1.37%	1.36%	1.37%	0.86%	1.25%	1.08%	1.46%	1.31%	1.79%	1.07%	1.17%	2.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLIN and MOAT in my portfolio?

GLIN and MOAT have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLIN or MOAT?

GLIN has higher volatility (6.70%) compared to MOAT (3.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLIN dropped -79.36% vs MOAT's -33.31%.

Which ETF is better, GLIN or MOAT?

On 10-year performance, MOAT leads with 13.37% vs 2.09% for GLIN. On fees, MOAT is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, MOAT has been the lower-risk option at 3.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLIN or MOAT?

Over the 10-year period, MOAT has performed better with a 13.37% return vs 2.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLIN or MOAT?

MOAT is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.82% for GLIN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLIN or MOAT?

MOAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 0.88% for GLIN.

What is the main difference between GLIN and MOAT?

GLIN is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while MOAT is Large Cap Blend Equities. GLIN tracks MarketGrader India All-Cap Growth Leaders Index, while MOAT tracks Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index. Their fees differ too: 0.82% for GLIN and 0.48% for MOAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MOAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs -0.26), 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.