Which returned more over the last year, BNDX or GDX?

In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BNDX returned −0.7% and GDX returned +40.2%, so GDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.

Which is cheaper, BNDX or GDX?

BNDX charges 0.07% a year and GDX charges 0.51%, so BNDX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Are BNDX and GDX the same kind of fund?

No. BNDX is an index ETF and GDX is a thematic ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

BNDX vs GDX: how they differ

Over the year GDX returned more, +40.2% against −0.7%, and BNDX charges 0.07% against 0.51%.

Vanguard Total International Bond Index Fund and VanEck Gold Miners ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, BNDX and GDX hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in BNDX	Only in GDX
French Republic Government Bond OAT 0.18%	Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd 10.67%
Bundesschatzanweisungen 0.14%	Newmont Corp 10.42%
Canadian Government Bond 0.13%	Barrick Mining Corp 7.95%
Canadian Government Bond 0.10%	Wheaton Precious Metals Corp 5.61%
Canadian Government Bond 0.10%	Anglogold Ashanti Plc 5.04%
Canadian Government Bond 0.09%	Franco-Nevada Corp 4.89%
Canadian Government Bond 0.08%	Kinross Gold Corp 4.40%
Canadian Government Bond 0.08%	Gold Fields Ltd 4.07%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.

BNDX and GDX on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
	BNDX Vanguard Total International Bond Index Fund	GDX VanEck Gold Miners ETF
Where it sits	Core index fund	Thematic ETF
Issuer	Vanguard	VanEck
What it is	Total International Bond	Miners and metals
Total return, 1 year	−0.7%	+40.2%
S&P 500 over the same days	+17.5%	+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500	−18.2 pts	+22.7 pts
Expense ratio	0.07%	0.51%
Holdings	6707	59

BNDX in plain words

BNDX is a bond fund tracking the Total International Bond. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −0.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year.

GDX in plain words

By weight, 11% of GDX's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 58% of the fund across 59 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +40.2% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 22.7 pts. It sits 16.2% below its all-time high of Feb 27, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, BNDX or GDX?: In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BNDX returned −0.7% and GDX returned +40.2%, so GDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, BNDX or GDX?: BNDX charges 0.07% a year and GDX charges 0.51%, so BNDX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Are BNDX and GDX the same kind of fund?: No. BNDX is an index ETF and GDX is a thematic ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

BNDX against GDX, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, BNDX against GDX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/BNDX-GDX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources