PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GNR vs. RLY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GNR vs. RLY - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GNR achieves a 20.27% return, which is significantly higher than RLY's 17.13% return. Over the past 10 years, GNR has outperformed RLY with an annualized return of 10.91%, while RLY has yielded a comparatively lower 8.56% 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%

RLY

1D
-0.30%
1M
-0.30%
YTD
17.13%
6M
18.27%
1Y
31.78%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
10.43%
10Y*
8.56%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GNR vs. RLY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
17.13%20.26%2.53%2.56%7.86%22.85%-0.59%15.63%-11.72%10.40%

Correlation

The correlation between GNR and RLY is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

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

0.91

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

0.92

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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2012

0.90

The correlation between GNR and RLY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

GNR vs. RLY - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GNR
RLY

Basic Materials

50.3%
25.1%

Energy

37.6%
30.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.6%
3.6%

Real Estate

0.8%
5.4%

Industrials

0.2%
16.5%

Financial Services

0.0%
0.0%

Healthcare

0.0%
0.8%

Utilities

0.0%
15.9%

Communication Services

-

-

Technology

-

-

Basic Materials

GNR
50.3%
RLY
25.1%

Energy

GNR
37.6%
RLY
30.1%

Consumer Cyclical

GNR
6.3%
RLY
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

GNR
4.6%
RLY
3.6%

Real Estate

GNR
0.8%
RLY
5.4%

Industrials

GNR
0.2%
RLY
16.5%

Financial Services

GNR
0.0%
RLY
0.0%

Healthcare

GNR
0.0%
RLY
0.8%

Utilities

GNR
0.0%
RLY
15.9%

Communication Services

GNR

-

RLY

-

Technology

GNR

-

RLY

-

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. RLY — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNR
GNR Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

RLY
RLY Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
RLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLY Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
RLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLY Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

GNR vs. RLY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY). 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.


GNRRLYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.95

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.60

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.43

8.60

-3.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.28

31.17

-9.89

GNR vs. RLY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is comparable to the RLY Sharpe Ratio of 3.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNR and RLY, 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


GNRRLYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.64

3.17

-0.53

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.77

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.62

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.26

0.38

-0.11

Drawdowns

GNR vs. RLY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, which is greater than RLY's maximum drawdown of -37.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and RLY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GNRRLYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.37%

-37.75%

-13.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.97%

-3.71%

-4.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.15%

-10.08%

-11.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.66%

-18.94%

-6.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.59%

-34.17%

-14.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.51%

-1.60%

+0.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.95%

-9.46%

-5.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.03%

1.02%

+1.01%

Volatility

GNR vs. RLY - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) has a higher volatility of 4.53% compared to SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) at 3.00%. This indicates that GNR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RLY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GNRRLYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.53%

3.00%

+1.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.23%

8.15%

+5.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.39%

10.06%

+6.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.23%

13.54%

+6.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.88%

13.81%

+8.07%

GNR vs. RLY - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than RLY's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

GNR vs. RLY - Dividend Comparison

GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, less than RLY's 2.86% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
2.86%3.24%3.31%3.71%5.66%12.15%2.16%3.45%2.76%1.85%2.07%1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions


GNR and RLY have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GNR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to RLY (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs RLY's -37.75%.

On 10-year performance, GNR leads with 10.91% vs 8.56% for RLY. On fees, GNR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, RLY has been the lower-risk option at 3.00%. 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 8.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GNR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for RLY.

RLY has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 2.47% for GNR.

GNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while RLY is Hedge Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.50% for RLY.

RLY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GNR and RLY

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