HAP vs. GDXJ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HAP is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index, while GDXJ is a Materials fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HAP returned 11.99%/yr vs 13.07%/yr for GDXJ. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HAP charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for GDXJ.

Performance

HAP vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HAP achieves a 21.49% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -2.55% return. Over the past 10 years, HAP has underperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 11.99%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively higher 13.07% annualized return.

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%

GDXJ

• 1D: -4.40%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: -2.55%
• 6M: 6.26%
• 1Y: 65.12%
• 3Y*: 46.12%
• 5Y*: 17.46%
• 10Y*: 13.07%

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

HAP vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
GDXJ VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF	-2.55%	172.28%	15.67%	7.12%	-14.53%	-21.25%	30.40%	40.44%	-11.02%	8.22%

Correlation

The correlation between HAP and GDXJ is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2009	0.46

The correlation between HAP and GDXJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (10 years) to 0.63 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HAP vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HAP	GDXJ
Basic Materials	36.7%	100.0%
Energy	32.3%	-
Industrials	10.2%	-
Utilities	9.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.5%	-
Healthcare	2.8%	-
Technology	0.9%	-
Real Estate	0.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Financial Services	-	-

Return for Risk

HAP vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

GDXJ

GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 35
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 35
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

HAP vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) and VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.

	HAP	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.14	1.32	+1.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.01	1.74	+2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.24	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.65	1.99	+3.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.05	4.95	+18.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HAP vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HAP Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is higher than the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HAP and GDXJ, 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

	HAP	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14	1.32	+1.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63	0.43	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61	0.30	+0.31
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.06	+0.20

Drawdowns

HAP vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HAP drawdown since its inception was -50.73%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAP and GDXJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	HAP	GDXJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.73%	-88.66%	+37.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.31%	-32.92%	+24.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.92%	-32.92%	+16.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.66%	-50.99%	+25.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.07%	-57.77%	+13.70%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.95%	-29.01%	+27.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.03%	-60.50%	+48.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	13.19%	-11.16%

Volatility

HAP vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) is 4.37%, while VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 16.66%. This indicates that HAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HAP	GDXJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.37%	16.66%	-12.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.24%	41.34%	-29.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.91%	49.79%	-34.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.24%	41.10%	-22.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.74%	44.06%	-24.32%

HAP vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

HAP has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXJ's 0.54% expense ratio.

Dividends

HAP vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison

HAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than GDXJ's 2.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GDXJ VanEck Vectors Junior Gold Miners ETF	2.39%	2.33%	2.61%	0.72%	0.51%	1.78%	1.58%	0.39%	0.45%	0.03%	4.78%	0.72%
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 HAP and GDXJ in my portfolio?

HAP and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HAP or GDXJ?

GDXJ has higher volatility (16.66%) compared to HAP (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HAP dropped -50.73% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.

Which ETF is better, HAP or GDXJ?

On 10-year performance, GDXJ leads with 13.07% vs 11.99% for HAP. On fees, HAP is cheaper at 0.42% 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, HAP or GDXJ?

Over the 10-year period, GDXJ has performed better with a 13.07% return vs 11.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HAP or GDXJ?

HAP is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for GDXJ.

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

GDXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.39%, compared with 1.87% for HAP.

What is the main difference between HAP and GDXJ?

HAP is categorized as Energy Equities, while GDXJ is Materials. HAP tracks MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index, while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for HAP and 0.54% for GDXJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.14 vs 1.31), 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.