HOMZ vs. GDXJ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

HOMZ (Hoya Capital Housing ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HOMZ is a Building & Construction fund tracking the Hoya Capital Housing 100 Index, while GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HOMZ returned 4.53%/yr vs 19.28%/yr for GDXJ. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HOMZ charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for GDXJ.

Performance

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hoya Capital Housing ETF (HOMZ) and VanEck 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, HOMZ achieves a -0.05% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -6.73% return.

HOMZ

• 1D: -1.01%
• 1M: 2.93%
• YTD: -0.05%
• 6M: -0.72%
• 1Y: 8.13%
• 3Y*: 9.35%
• 5Y*: 4.53%
• 10Y*: —

GDXJ

• 1D: -1.03%
• 1M: -4.93%
• YTD: -6.73%
• 6M: -11.57%
• 1Y: 61.56%
• 3Y*: 47.15%
• 5Y*: 19.28%
• 10Y*: 11.51%

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

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
HOMZ Hoya Capital Housing ETF	-0.05%	2.72%	9.49%	36.49%	-28.14%	41.02%	15.80%	17.38%
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF	-6.73%	172.28%	15.67%	7.12%	-14.53%	-21.25%	30.40%	31.68%

Correlation

The correlation between HOMZ and GDXJ is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.25
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2019	0.24

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HOMZ	GDXJ
Real Estate	38.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	34.7%	-
Industrials	10.1%	-
Financial Services	9.5%	0.1%
Basic Materials	3.9%	99.5%
Technology	1.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	-
Communication Services	0.6%	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

HOMZ vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

HOMZ

HOMZ Risk / Return Rank: 14
HOMZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
HOMZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
HOMZ Omega Ratio Rank: 14
HOMZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
HOMZ Martin Ratio Rank: 13

GDXJ

GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 32
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 34
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hoya Capital Housing ETF (HOMZ) and VanEck 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.

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.

	HOMZ	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.41	1.19	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.79	1.63	-0.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.22	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.49	1.57	-1.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.07	4.14	-3.07

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HOMZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is lower than the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HOMZ 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.

Drawdowns

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HOMZ drawdown since its inception was -48.10%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HOMZ and GDXJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	HOMZ	GDXJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.10%	-88.66%	+40.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.71%	-39.47%	+22.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.91%	-39.47%	+16.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.76%	-48.79%	+15.03%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-57.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.70%	-32.06%	+22.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.73%	-60.41%	+50.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.62%	14.91%	-7.29%

Volatility

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Hoya Capital Housing ETF (HOMZ) is 5.24%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 19.55%. This indicates that HOMZ 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

	HOMZ	GDXJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.24%	19.55%	-14.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.05%	44.13%	-30.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.83%	52.24%	-32.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.55%	41.64%	-20.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.97%	44.30%	-19.33%

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

HOMZ has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

HOMZ vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison

HOMZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, more than GDXJ's 2.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF	2.50%	2.33%	2.61%	0.72%	0.51%	1.78%	1.58%	0.39%	0.45%	0.03%	4.78%	0.72%
HOMZ Hoya Capital Housing ETF	2.68%	2.54%	2.13%	2.08%	2.03%	1.21%	3.18%	1.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HOMZ and GDXJ in my portfolio?

HOMZ and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HOMZ or GDXJ?

GDXJ has higher volatility (19.55%) compared to HOMZ (5.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HOMZ dropped -48.10% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.

Which ETF is better, HOMZ or GDXJ?

On 5-year performance, GDXJ leads with 19.28% vs 4.53% for HOMZ. On fees, HOMZ is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, HOMZ has been the lower-risk option at 5.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HOMZ or GDXJ?

Over the 5-year period, GDXJ has performed better with a 19.28% return vs 4.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HOMZ or GDXJ?

HOMZ is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for GDXJ.

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

HOMZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.68%, compared with 2.50% for GDXJ.

What is the main difference between HOMZ and GDXJ?

HOMZ is categorized as Building & Construction, while GDXJ is Gold. HOMZ tracks Hoya Capital Housing 100 Index, while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Pettee Investors and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HOMZ and 0.52% for GDXJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GDXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 0.41), 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.