GNR vs. MOO

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) and MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) are both Natural Resources funds - GNR tracks the S&P Global Natural Resources Index while MOO tracks the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GNR returned 9.43%/yr vs 7.23%/yr for MOO. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GNR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for MOO.

Performance

GNR vs. MOO - 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 Agribusiness ETF (MOO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with GNR having a 12.16% return and MOO slightly lower at 11.94%. Over the past 10 years, GNR has outperformed MOO with an annualized return of 9.43%, while MOO has yielded a comparatively lower 7.23% annualized return.

GNR

• 1D: 0.64%
• 1M: -4.41%
• 6M: 7.47%
• YTD: 12.16%
• 1Y: 25.41%
• 3Y*: 11.05%
• 5Y*: 9.46%
• 10Y*: 9.43%

MOO

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: 3.68%
• 6M: 8.42%
• YTD: 11.94%
• 1Y: 12.19%
• 3Y*: 2.07%
• 5Y*: 0.16%
• 10Y*: 7.23%

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

GNR vs. MOO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	12.16%	28.68%	-8.27%	2.95%	10.20%	24.73%	-0.03%	16.49%	-13.19%	22.64%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	11.94%	15.61%	-12.43%	-8.57%	-8.10%	23.99%	14.59%	22.29%	-6.03%	21.75%

Correlation

The correlation between GNR and MOO is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2010	0.82

The correlation between GNR and MOO shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GNR vs. MOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GNR	MOO
Basic Materials	52.1%	25.2%
Energy	35.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	37.8%
Real Estate	0.8%	-
Industrials	0.2%	21.7%
Financial Services	0.0%	-
Healthcare	0.0%	15.3%
Utilities	0.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

GNR vs. MOO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNR

GNR Risk / Return Rank: 55
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 53
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 57

MOO

MOO Risk / Return Rank: 28
MOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
MOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
MOO Omega Ratio Rank: 27
MOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
MOO Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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. MOO - 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 Agribusiness ETF (MOO). 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	MOO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	0.85	+0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.99	1.32	+0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.15	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	1.10	+1.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.82	2.84	+4.99

GNR vs. MOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNR Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is higher than the MOO Sharpe Ratio of 0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNR and MOO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GNR vs. MOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, smaller than the maximum MOO drawdown of -69.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and MOO.

Drawdown Indicators

	GNR	MOO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.37%	-69.53%	+18.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.99%	-11.17%	+0.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.15%	-26.83%	+5.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.66%	-39.52%	+13.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.59%	-39.52%	-9.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.15%	-16.12%	+7.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.90%	-16.98%	+2.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.27%	4.31%	-1.04%

Volatility

GNR vs. MOO - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) has a higher volatility of 5.03% compared to VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) at 4.33%. This indicates that GNR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GNR	MOO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.03%	4.33%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.04%	11.10%	+2.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.16%	14.39%	+2.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.25%	17.18%	+3.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.76%	18.13%	+3.63%

GNR vs. MOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MOO's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

GNR vs. MOO - Dividend Comparison

GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, more than MOO's 2.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	2.65%	2.76%	4.73%	3.37%	4.37%	3.44%	2.78%	3.84%	3.51%	2.40%	2.06%	4.59%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	2.21%	2.47%	3.41%	2.93%	2.15%	1.17%	1.10%	1.26%	1.69%	1.44%	2.14%	2.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GNR and MOO in my portfolio?

GNR and MOO have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GNR or MOO?

GNR has higher volatility (5.03%) compared to MOO (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs MOO's -69.53%.

Which ETF is better, GNR or MOO?

On 10-year performance, GNR leads with 9.43% vs 7.23% for MOO. On fees, GNR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, MOO has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GNR or MOO?

Over the 10-year period, GNR has performed better with a 9.43% return vs 7.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GNR or MOO?

GNR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for MOO.

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

GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.65%, compared with 2.21% for MOO.

What is the main difference between GNR and MOO?

GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while MOO tracks MVIS Global Agribusiness Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.56% for MOO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.85), 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.