GNR vs. HAP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) and HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while HAP is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GNR returned 10.91%/yr vs 11.99%/yr for HAP. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. GNR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for HAP.

Performance

GNR vs. HAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GNR achieves a 20.27% return, which is significantly lower than HAP's 21.49% return. Over the past 10 years, GNR has underperformed HAP with an annualized return of 10.91%, while HAP has yielded a comparatively higher 11.99% annualized return.

GNR

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 1.20%
• YTD: 20.27%
• 6M: 23.12%
• 1Y: 43.10%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: 9.73%
• 10Y*: 10.91%

HAP

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 0.64%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 23.70%
• 1Y: 46.66%
• 3Y*: 18.93%
• 5Y*: 11.51%
• 10Y*: 11.99%

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

GNR vs. HAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	20.27%	28.68%	-8.27%	2.95%	10.20%	24.73%	-0.03%	16.49%	-13.19%	22.64%
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF	21.49%	34.91%	-4.08%	2.46%	7.84%	25.04%	6.30%	18.60%	-10.68%	17.12%

Correlation

The correlation between GNR and HAP is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2010	0.95

The correlation between GNR and HAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

GNR vs. HAP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GNR	HAP
Basic Materials	50.3%	36.7%
Energy	37.6%	32.3%
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	6.5%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.4%
Industrials	0.2%	10.2%
Financial Services	0.0%	-
Healthcare	0.0%	2.8%
Utilities	0.0%	9.8%
Communication Services	-	-
Technology	-	0.9%

Return for Risk

GNR vs. HAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNR

GNR Risk / Return Rank: 82
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 76
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 90

HAP

HAP Risk / Return Rank: 89
HAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
HAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HAP Omega Ratio Rank: 88
HAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
HAP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

GNR vs. HAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP). 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.

	GNR	HAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	3.14	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.38	4.01	-0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.56	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.43	5.65	-0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.28	23.05	-1.77
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GNR vs. HAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is comparable to the HAP Sharpe Ratio of 3.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNR and HAP, 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

	GNR	HAP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	3.14	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48	0.63	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	0.61	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.26	0.00

Drawdowns

GNR vs. HAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, roughly equal to the maximum HAP drawdown of -50.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and HAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	GNR	HAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.37%	-50.73%	-0.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.97%	-8.31%	+0.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.15%	-16.92%	-4.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.66%	-25.66%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.59%	-44.07%	-4.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.51%	-1.95%	+0.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.95%	-12.03%	-2.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	2.03%	0.00%

Volatility

GNR vs. HAP - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) have volatilities of 4.53% and 4.37%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GNR	HAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	4.37%	+0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.23%	12.24%	+0.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.39%	14.91%	+1.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.23%	18.24%	+1.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.88%	19.74%	+2.14%

GNR vs. HAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than HAP's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

GNR vs. HAP - Dividend Comparison

GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, more than HAP's 1.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	2.47%	2.76%	4.73%	3.37%	4.37%	3.44%	2.78%	3.84%	3.51%	2.40%	2.06%	4.59%
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF	1.87%	2.27%	2.65%	3.27%	3.28%	2.16%	2.45%	2.80%	2.85%	2.02%	1.99%	3.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GNR and HAP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, GNR and HAP move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GNR or HAP?

GNR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to HAP (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs HAP's -50.73%.

Which ETF is better, GNR or HAP?

On 10-year performance, HAP leads with 11.99% vs 10.91% for GNR. On fees, GNR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, HAP has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GNR or HAP?

Over the 10-year period, HAP has performed better with a 11.99% return vs 10.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GNR or HAP?

GNR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for HAP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GNR or HAP?

GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 1.87% for HAP.

What is the main difference between GNR and HAP?

GNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while HAP is Energy Equities. GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while HAP tracks MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.42% for HAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.14 vs 2.64), 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.