PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GMVM.DE vs. MOAT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (GMVM.DE) and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

GMVM.DE is traded in EUR, while MOAT is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the MOAT values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMVM.DE achieves a -1.57% return, which is significantly lower than MOAT's 1.07% return. Over the past 10 years, GMVM.DE has underperformed MOAT with an annualized return of 10.29%, while MOAT has yielded a comparatively higher 13.15% annualized return.


GMVM.DE

1D
0.97%
1M
4.27%
YTD
-1.57%
6M
-2.00%
1Y
6.45%
3Y*
5.24%
5Y*
4.14%
10Y*
10.29%

MOAT

1D
0.74%
1M
4.26%
YTD
1.07%
6M
0.22%
1Y
13.57%
3Y*
8.82%
5Y*
9.20%
10Y*
13.15%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GMVM.DE
VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF
-1.57%-4.56%17.59%14.37%-14.38%36.91%2.73%38.45%2.27%7.97%
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
1.07%-0.23%18.04%27.93%-8.31%33.40%5.37%37.84%3.35%8.04%

Correlation

The correlation between GMVM.DE and MOAT is 0.71, 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

0.71

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.63

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2015

0.63

The correlation between GMVM.DE and MOAT shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (5 years) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMVM.DE
GMVM.DE Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
GMVM.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMVM.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMVM.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
GMVM.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMVM.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

MOAT
MOAT Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
MOAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MOAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
MOAT Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
MOAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
MOAT Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (GMVM.DE) and VanEck 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.


GMVM.DEMOATDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.17

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.58

1.17

-0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.37

3.14

-1.77

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMVM.DE Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is lower than the MOAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMVM.DE 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GMVM.DEMOATDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

0.99

-0.51

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

0.52

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

0.69

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.62

0.80

-0.19

Drawdowns

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMVM.DE drawdown since its inception was -32.25%, roughly equal to the maximum MOAT drawdown of -32.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMVM.DE and MOAT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GMVM.DEMOATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.25%

-32.83%

+0.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.00%

-11.65%

+0.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.74%

-25.00%

-0.74%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.74%

-25.00%

-0.74%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.25%

-32.83%

+0.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.18%

-3.92%

-6.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.85%

-4.30%

-1.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.69%

4.33%

+0.36%

Volatility

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF (GMVM.DE) is 3.23%, while VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) has a volatility of 3.55%. This indicates that GMVM.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MOAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GMVM.DEMOATDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.23%

3.55%

-0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.82%

9.73%

-0.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.33%

13.76%

-0.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.26%

17.62%

-2.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.54%

18.99%

-2.45%

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMVM.DE has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than MOAT's 0.47% expense ratio.


Dividends

GMVM.DE vs. MOAT - Dividend Comparison

GMVM.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MOAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GMVM.DE
VanEck Morningstar US Sustainable Wide Moat UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
1.36%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


GMVM.DE and MOAT have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MOAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MOAT is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GMVM.DE.

GMVM.DE tracks Morningstar US Sustainable Moat Focus, while MOAT tracks Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GMVM.DE and 0.47% for MOAT.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GMVM.DE and MOAT

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