NRES vs. MOO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

NRES (Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF) and MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) are both Natural Resources funds. NRES is actively managed, while MOO is passively managed. Over the past year, NRES returned 34.49% vs 16.07% for MOO. Their 0.72 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NRES charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for MOO.

Performance

NRES vs. MOO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NRES achieves a 13.66% return, which is significantly higher than MOO's 12.27% return.

NRES

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: 5.89%
• 6M: 2.78%
• YTD: 13.66%
• 1Y: 34.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.91%

MOO

• 1D: -2.16%
• 1M: 1.00%
• 6M: 1.76%
• YTD: 12.27%
• 1Y: 16.07%
• 3Y*: 0.90%
• 5Y*: 0.10%
• 10Y*: 7.40%
• ALL TIME*: 5.50%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	$14.26M	$13.98M	$22.17M
NRES Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF	$30.73K	$18.46K	$20.92K

NRES vs. MOO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NRES Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF	13.66%	27.08%	-3.05%
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	12.27%	15.61%	-8.10%

Correlation

The correlation between NRES and MOO is 0.67, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2024	0.72

The correlation between NRES and MOO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

NRES vs. MOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NRES	MOO
Basic Materials	47.4%	26.1%
Energy	32.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.1%	33.4%
Real Estate	1.5%	-
Healthcare	1.2%	16.8%
Industrials	0.9%	23.7%
Communication Services	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NRES vs. MOO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NRES

NRES Risk / Return Rank: 76
NRES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
NRES Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
NRES Omega Ratio Rank: 80
NRES Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
NRES Martin Ratio Rank: 63

MOO

MOO Risk / Return Rank: 41
MOO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
MOO Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
MOO Omega Ratio Rank: 42
MOO Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
MOO Martin Ratio Rank: 36

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NRES vs. MOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). 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.

	NRES	MOO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.97	1.09	+0.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.58	1.63	+0.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.19	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	1.40	+1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.70	3.60	+4.11

NRES vs. MOO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRES Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is higher than the MOO Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRES and MOO, 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

NRES vs. MOO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRES drawdown since its inception was -22.22%, smaller than the maximum MOO drawdown of -69.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRES and MOO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NRES	MOO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.22%	-69.53%	+47.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.25%	-11.17%	-2.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.85%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.52%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.52%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.61%	-15.87%	+9.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.48%	-16.97%	+11.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.45%	4.33%	+0.12%

Volatility

NRES vs. MOO - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) have volatilities of 4.16% and 4.28%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NRES	MOO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.16%	4.28%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.75%	11.00%	+2.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.50%	14.29%	+3.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.03%	17.18%	+0.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.03%	18.14%	-0.11%

NRES vs. MOO - Expense Ratio Comparison

NRES has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than MOO's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

NRES vs. MOO - Dividend Comparison

NRES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, more than MOO's 2.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF	2.20%	2.47%	3.41%	2.93%	2.15%	1.17%	1.10%	1.26%	1.69%	1.44%	2.14%	2.89%
NRES Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF	2.50%	2.65%	3.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NRES and MOO in my portfolio?

NRES and MOO have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NRES or MOO?

MOO has higher volatility (4.28%) compared to NRES (4.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NRES dropped -22.22% vs MOO's -69.53%.

Which ETF is better, NRES or MOO?

On 1-year performance, NRES leads with 34.49% vs 16.07% for MOO. On fees, NRES is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, NRES has been the lower-risk option at 4.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NRES or MOO?

Over the 1-year period, NRES has performed better with a 34.49% return vs 16.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NRES or MOO?

NRES is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for MOO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NRES or MOO?

NRES has the higher dividend yield at 2.50%, compared with 2.20% for MOO.

What is the main difference between NRES and MOO?

They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for NRES and 0.56% for MOO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NRES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.09), 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.