MAGS vs. GDXJ

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. MAGS is actively managed, while GDXJ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MAGS returned 33.16%/yr vs 42.13%/yr for GDXJ. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MAGS charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for GDXJ.

Performance

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) 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, MAGS achieves a 0.86% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -10.70% return.

MAGS

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: -4.44%
• YTD: 0.86%
• 6M: 0.73%
• 1Y: 28.10%
• 3Y*: 33.16%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GDXJ

• 1D: 1.01%
• 1M: -19.25%
• YTD: -10.70%
• 6M: -0.52%
• 1Y: 50.65%
• 3Y*: 42.13%
• 5Y*: 15.86%
• 10Y*: 11.53%

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

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	0.86%	22.99%	63.97%	37.32%
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF	-10.70%	172.28%	15.67%	-8.77%

Correlation

The correlation between MAGS and GDXJ is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2023	0.16

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MAGS	GDXJ
Technology	15.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	-
Communication Services	9.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	100.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MAGS vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAGS

MAGS Risk / Return Rank: 39
MAGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
MAGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
MAGS Omega Ratio Rank: 41
MAGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Martin Ratio Rank: 37

GDXJ

GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 31
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 33
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) 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.

	MAGS	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	1.00	+0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	1.45	+0.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.20	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.52	1.43	+0.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.22	3.72	+1.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAGS Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is higher than the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAGS 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

	MAGS	GDXJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.40	1.00	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.39	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.26	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.49	0.05	+1.44

Drawdowns

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAGS drawdown since its inception was -29.91%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGS and GDXJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAGS	GDXJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.91%	-88.66%	+58.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.62%	-35.60%	+16.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.91%	-35.60%	+5.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-50.99%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-57.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.22%	-34.94%	+28.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.70%	-60.48%	+55.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.40%	13.67%	-8.27%

Volatility

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) is 5.89%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 17.66%. This indicates that MAGS 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

	MAGS	GDXJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.89%	17.66%	-11.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.84%	42.71%	-27.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.22%	50.84%	-30.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.99%	41.34%	-15.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.99%	44.15%	-18.16%

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAGS has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

MAGS vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison

MAGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than GDXJ's 2.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF	2.61%	2.33%	2.61%	0.72%	0.51%	1.78%	1.58%	0.39%	0.45%	0.03%	4.78%	0.72%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	1.47%	1.48%	0.81%	0.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MAGS and GDXJ in my portfolio?

MAGS and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MAGS or GDXJ?

GDXJ has higher volatility (17.66%) compared to MAGS (5.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGS dropped -29.91% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.

Which ETF is better, MAGS or GDXJ?

On 3-year performance, GDXJ leads with 42.13% vs 33.16% for MAGS. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAGS or GDXJ?

Over the 3-year period, GDXJ has performed better with a 42.13% return vs 33.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAGS or GDXJ?

MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for GDXJ.

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

GDXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 1.47% for MAGS.

What is the main difference between MAGS and GDXJ?

MAGS is categorized as Technology Equities, while GDXJ is Gold. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for MAGS and 0.52% for GDXJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 1.00), 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.