GNR vs. BND
GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) and BND (Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while BND is a Total Bond Market fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Float Adjusted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GNR returned 10.91%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for BND. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. GNR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for BND.
Performance
GNR vs. BND - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GNR achieves a 17.34% return, which is significantly higher than BND's 0.52% return. Over the past 10 years, GNR has outperformed BND with an annualized return of 10.91%, while BND has yielded a comparatively lower 1.58% annualized return.
GNR
- 1D
- 1.21%
- 1M
- -3.83%
- YTD
- 17.34%
- 6M
- 18.86%
- 1Y
- 35.92%
- 3Y*
- 13.61%
- 5Y*
- 9.29%
- 10Y*
- 10.91%
BND
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.42%
- YTD
- 0.52%
- 6M
- 0.91%
- 1Y
- 4.40%
- 3Y*
- 4.17%
- 5Y*
- 0.03%
- 10Y*
- 1.58%
GNR vs. BND - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF | 17.34% | 28.68% | -8.27% | 2.95% | 10.20% | 24.73% | -0.03% | 16.49% | -13.19% | 22.64% |
BND Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF | 0.52% | 7.08% | 1.38% | 5.65% | -13.11% | -1.86% | 7.71% | 8.84% | -0.12% | 3.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between GNR and BND is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2010 | -0.09 |
The correlation between GNR and BND shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (all time) to 0.18 (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
GNR vs. BND — Risk / Return Rank
GNR
BND
GNR vs. BND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND). 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.
| GNR | BND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.21 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.53 | 1.65 | +2.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.42 | 4.81 | +11.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GNR vs. BND - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, which is greater than BND's maximum drawdown of -18.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and BND.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GNR | BND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.37% | -18.58% | -32.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.97% | -2.68% | -5.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.15% | -5.92% | -15.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | -17.91% | -7.75% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.59% | -18.58% | -30.01% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.91% | -2.12% | -1.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.93% | -3.06% | -11.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | 0.92% | +1.27% |
Volatility
GNR vs. BND - Volatility Comparison
SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) has a higher volatility of 5.75% compared to Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) at 1.28%. This indicates that GNR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GNR | BND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.75% | 1.28% | +4.47% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.87% | 2.74% | +11.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.04% | 3.75% | +13.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.33% | 6.03% | +14.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.89% | 5.53% | +16.36% |
GNR vs. BND - Expense Ratio Comparison
GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than BND's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
GNR vs. BND - Dividend Comparison
GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, less than BND's 3.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BND Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF | 3.96% | 3.86% | 3.67% | 3.09% | 2.60% | 2.12% | 2.38% | 2.72% | 2.81% | 2.54% | 2.51% | 2.57% |
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF | 2.53% | 2.76% | 4.73% | 3.37% | 4.37% | 3.44% | 2.78% | 3.84% | 3.51% | 2.40% | 2.06% | 4.59% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GNR and BND have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GNR has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to BND (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs BND's -18.58%.
On 10-year performance, GNR leads with 10.91% vs 1.58% for BND. On fees, BND is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, BND has been the lower-risk option at 1.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GNR has performed better with a 10.91% return vs 1.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BND is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.
BND has the higher dividend yield at 3.96%, compared with 2.53% for GNR.
GNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while BND is Total Bond Market. GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while BND tracks Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Float Adjusted Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.03% for BND.
GNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.18), 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 GNR and BND
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