QGRW vs. GDMN
QGRW (WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund) and GDMN (WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - QGRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Index, while GDMN is a Commodities fund actively managed by WisdomTree. QGRW is passively managed, while GDMN is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QGRW returned 29.10%/yr vs 60.95%/yr for GDMN. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QGRW charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for GDMN.
Performance
QGRW vs. GDMN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QGRW achieves a 15.43% return, which is significantly higher than GDMN's -4.13% return.
QGRW
- 1D
- -1.04%
- 1M
- 9.03%
- YTD
- 15.43%
- 6M
- 14.57%
- 1Y
- 35.66%
- 3Y*
- 29.10%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GDMN
- 1D
- -3.68%
- 1M
- -2.43%
- YTD
- -4.13%
- 6M
- 2.73%
- 1Y
- 76.93%
- 3Y*
- 60.95%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QGRW vs. GDMN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund | 15.43% | 19.20% | 34.85% | 56.05% | -3.30% |
GDMN WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund | -4.13% | 237.09% | 28.23% | 12.97% | 5.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between QGRW and GDMN 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 | 0.19 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2022 | 0.16 |
QGRW vs. GDMN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QGRW
GDMN
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Industrials
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
-
Energy
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
QGRW
GDMN
-
Communication Services
QGRW
GDMN
-
Consumer Cyclical
QGRW
GDMN
-
Industrials
QGRW
GDMN
-
Healthcare
QGRW
GDMN
-
Financial Services
QGRW
GDMN
-
Energy
QGRW
GDMN
-
Consumer Defensive
QGRW
GDMN
-
Utilities
QGRW
GDMN
-
Basic Materials
QGRW
-
GDMN
Real Estate
QGRW
-
GDMN
-
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
QGRW vs. GDMN — Risk / Return Rank
QGRW
GDMN
QGRW vs. GDMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) and WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund (GDMN). 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.
| QGRW | GDMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.25 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.32 | 1.98 | +0.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.08 | 4.68 | +4.41 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QGRW | GDMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.06 | 1.26 | +0.80 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.66 | 0.80 | +0.85 |
Drawdowns
QGRW vs. GDMN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QGRW drawdown since its inception was -24.40%, smaller than the maximum GDMN drawdown of -52.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QGRW and GDMN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QGRW | GDMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.40% | -52.82% | +28.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.44% | -39.03% | +23.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.40% | -39.03% | +14.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.33% | -37.06% | +35.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.26% | -18.89% | +15.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.94% | 16.51% | -12.57% |
Volatility
QGRW vs. GDMN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) is 4.71%, while WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund (GDMN) has a volatility of 17.94%. This indicates that QGRW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDMN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QGRW | GDMN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.71% | 17.94% | -13.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.67% | 51.79% | -38.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.40% | 61.32% | -43.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.08% | 47.59% | -26.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.08% | 47.59% | -26.51% |
QGRW vs. GDMN - Expense Ratio Comparison
QGRW has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than GDMN's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
QGRW vs. GDMN - Dividend Comparison
QGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, less than GDMN's 2.82% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDMN WisdomTree Efficient Gold Plus Gold Miners Strategy Fund | 2.82% | 2.70% | 9.44% | 7.69% | 1.44% |
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund | 0.07% | 0.09% | 0.14% | 0.11% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QGRW and GDMN 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.
GDMN has higher volatility (17.94%) compared to QGRW (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QGRW dropped -24.40% vs GDMN's -52.82%.
On 3-year performance, GDMN leads with 60.95% vs 29.10% for QGRW. On fees, QGRW is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QGRW has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GDMN has performed better with a 60.95% return vs 29.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QGRW is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for GDMN.
GDMN has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 0.07% for QGRW.
QGRW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while GDMN is Commodities. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for QGRW and 0.45% for GDMN.
QGRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.26), 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 QGRW and GDMN
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