Get the weekly note

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

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

GDX vs MTUM: how they differ

Over the year GDX returned more, +40.2% against +21.8%, and MTUM charges 0.15% against 0.51%.

VanEck Gold Miners ETF and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, GDX and MTUM hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions GDX and MTUM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingGDXMTUM
Newmont Corp10.42%1.17%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in GDXOnly in MTUM
Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd 10.67%MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 5.57%
Barrick Mining Corp 7.95%BROADCOM INC. 5.41%
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp 5.61%NVIDIA CORPORATION 4.65%
Anglogold Ashanti Plc 5.04%ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 4.04%
Franco-Nevada Corp 4.89%INTEL CORPORATION 3.84%
Kinross Gold Corp 4.40%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 3.76%
Gold Fields Ltd 4.07%LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION 3.62%
Pan American Silver Corp 2.98%EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 3.44%

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.

GDX and MTUM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
GDX
VanEck Gold Miners ETF
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
Where it sitsThematic ETFCore index fund
IssuerVanEckiShares
What it isMiners and metalsMSCI USA Momentum Factor
Total return, 1 year+40.2%+21.8%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+22.7 pts+4.3 pts
Expense ratio0.51%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50011.0%98.2%
Holdings59125

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.

MTUM in plain words

MTUM is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Momentum Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 98% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 125 positions, with the top ten at 40.5%. It sat 11.1% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, GDX or MTUM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GDX returned +40.2% and MTUM returned +21.8%, so GDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, GDX or MTUM?
GDX charges 0.51% a year and MTUM charges 0.15%, so MTUM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do GDX and MTUM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 11% of GDX and 98% of MTUM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
Are GDX and MTUM the same kind of fund?
No. GDX is a thematic ETF and MTUM is an index 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources