SMH vs. GNR
SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) and GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index, while GNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SMH returned 37.49%/yr vs 10.91%/yr for GNR. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SMH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GNR.
Performance
SMH vs. GNR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMH achieves a 72.15% return, which is significantly higher than GNR's 17.34% return. Over the past 10 years, SMH has outperformed GNR with an annualized return of 37.49%, while GNR has yielded a comparatively lower 10.91% annualized return.
SMH
- 1D
- 1.72%
- 1M
- 8.30%
- YTD
- 72.15%
- 6M
- 75.62%
- 1Y
- 136.32%
- 3Y*
- 60.05%
- 5Y*
- 38.42%
- 10Y*
- 37.49%
GNR
- 1D
- 1.21%
- 1M
- -3.83%
- YTD
- 17.34%
- 6M
- 18.86%
- 1Y
- 35.92%
- 3Y*
- 13.61%
- 5Y*
- 9.29%
- 10Y*
- 10.91%
SMH vs. GNR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 72.15% | 49.17% | 39.10% | 73.38% | -33.53% | 42.13% | 55.53% | 64.45% | -9.05% | 38.48% |
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF | 17.34% | 28.68% | -8.27% | 2.95% | 10.20% | 24.73% | -0.03% | 16.49% | -13.19% | 22.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMH and GNR is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2010 | 0.53 |
The correlation between SMH and GNR shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
SMH vs. GNR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SMH
GNR
Technology
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
SMH
GNR
-
Basic Materials
SMH
-
GNR
Communication Services
SMH
-
GNR
-
Consumer Cyclical
SMH
-
GNR
Consumer Defensive
SMH
-
GNR
Energy
SMH
-
GNR
Financial Services
SMH
-
GNR
Healthcare
SMH
-
GNR
Industrials
SMH
-
GNR
Real Estate
SMH
-
GNR
Utilities
SMH
-
GNR
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
SMH vs. GNR — Risk / Return Rank
SMH
GNR
SMH vs. GNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). 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.
| SMH | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.52 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 1.37 | +0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.18 | 4.53 | +4.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 33.74 | 16.42 | +17.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SMH vs. GNR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMH drawdown since its inception was -84.96%, which is greater than GNR's maximum drawdown of -51.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMH and GNR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMH | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.96% | -51.37% | -33.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.93% | -7.97% | -6.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.74% | -21.15% | -14.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.30% | -25.66% | -19.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.30% | -48.59% | +3.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.81% | -3.91% | +1.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.04% | -14.93% | -26.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.06% | 2.19% | +1.87% |
Volatility
SMH vs. GNR - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a higher volatility of 16.25% compared to SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) at 5.75%. This indicates that SMH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMH | GNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.25% | 5.75% | +10.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.73% | 13.87% | +13.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.20% | 17.04% | +16.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.47% | 20.33% | +15.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.82% | 21.89% | +10.93% |
SMH vs. GNR - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GNR's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMH vs. GNR - Dividend Comparison
SMH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, less than GNR's 2.53% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF | 2.53% | 2.76% | 4.73% | 3.37% | 4.37% | 3.44% | 2.78% | 3.84% | 3.51% | 2.40% | 2.06% | 4.59% |
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 0.18% | 0.31% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 1.18% | 0.51% | 0.69% | 1.50% | 1.88% | 1.43% | 0.80% | 2.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMH and GNR have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMH has higher volatility (16.25%) compared to GNR (5.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMH dropped -84.96% vs GNR's -51.37%.
On 10-year performance, SMH leads with 37.49% vs 10.91% for GNR. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 5.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SMH has performed better with a 37.49% return vs 10.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.
GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.18% for SMH.
SMH is categorized as Semiconductors, while GNR is Commodity Producers Equities. SMH tracks MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index, while GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for SMH and 0.40% for GNR.
SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.13 vs 2.12), 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 SMH and GNR
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