GNR vs. SMH
GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) and SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GNR returned 10.91%/yr vs 37.49%/yr for SMH. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GNR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.
Performance
GNR vs. SMH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GNR achieves a 17.34% return, which is significantly lower than SMH's 72.15% return. Over the past 10 years, GNR has underperformed SMH with an annualized return of 10.91%, while SMH has yielded a comparatively higher 37.49% 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%
SMH
- 1D
- 1.72%
- 1M
- 8.30%
- YTD
- 72.15%
- 6M
- 75.62%
- 1Y
- 136.32%
- 3Y*
- 60.05%
- 5Y*
- 38.42%
- 10Y*
- 37.49%
GNR vs. SMH - 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% |
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 72.15% | 49.17% | 39.10% | 73.38% | -33.53% | 42.13% | 55.53% | 64.45% | -9.05% | 38.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between GNR and SMH is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2010 | 0.53 |
The correlation between GNR and SMH shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GNR vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GNR
SMH
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Industrials
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Communication Services
-
-
Technology
-
Basic Materials
GNR
SMH
-
Energy
GNR
SMH
-
Consumer Cyclical
GNR
SMH
-
Consumer Defensive
GNR
SMH
-
Real Estate
GNR
SMH
-
Industrials
GNR
SMH
-
Financial Services
GNR
SMH
-
Healthcare
GNR
SMH
-
Utilities
GNR
SMH
-
Communication Services
GNR
-
SMH
-
Technology
GNR
-
SMH
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. SMH — Risk / Return Rank
GNR
SMH
GNR vs. SMH - 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 Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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 | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.60 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.53 | 9.18 | -4.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.42 | 33.74 | -17.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GNR vs. SMH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, smaller than the maximum SMH drawdown of -84.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and SMH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GNR | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.37% | -84.96% | +33.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.97% | -14.93% | +6.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.15% | -35.74% | +14.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | -45.30% | +19.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.59% | -45.30% | -3.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.91% | -2.81% | -1.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.93% | -41.04% | +26.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | 4.06% | -1.87% |
Volatility
GNR vs. SMH - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) is 5.75%, while VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a volatility of 16.25%. This indicates that GNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GNR | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.75% | 16.25% | -10.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.87% | 27.73% | -13.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.04% | 33.20% | -16.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.33% | 35.47% | -15.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.89% | 32.82% | -10.93% |
GNR vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison
GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
GNR vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison
GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, more than SMH's 0.18% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 0.18% | 0.31% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 1.18% | 0.51% | 0.69% | 1.50% | 1.88% | 1.43% | 0.80% | 2.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GNR and SMH have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMH has higher volatility (16.25%) compared to GNR (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs SMH's -84.96%.
On 10-year performance, SMH leads with 37.49% vs 10.91% for GNR. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 5.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SMH has performed better with a 37.49% return vs 10.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.
GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.18% for SMH.
GNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while SMH is Semiconductors. GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while SMH tracks MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.35% for SMH.
SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.13 vs 2.12), 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 SMH
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