Data as of .
GDXJ vs PPA: which is really different?
PPA holds 71.8% of its weight in S&P 500 companies and GDXJ 0.0%.
ETFIQ Off-Index Score: GDXJ scores higher
How much of it is not the index it is sold as an alternative to?
A percentile among the 371 thematic ETFs with a holdings filing. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All thematic ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, GDXJ and PPA hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in GDXJ | Only in PPA |
|---|---|
| Equinox Gold Corp 6.98% | RTX Corp 8.29% |
| Evolution Mining Ltd 6.14% | Boeing Co/The 7.05% |
| Alamos Gold Inc 5.78% | General Electric Co 6.94% |
| Endeavour Mining Plc 5.16% | Lockheed Martin Corp 6.59% |
| Coeur Mining Inc 5.05% | General Dynamics Corp 4.97% |
| Industrias Penoles Sab De Cv 2.76% | Northrop Grumman Corp 4.95% |
| Eldorado Gold Corp 2.71% | Howmet Aerospace Inc 3.92% |
| Hecla Mining Co 2.69% | Parker-Hannifin Corp 3.84% |
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 Sep 10, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GDXJ | PPA | GDXJ | PPA | GDXJ | PPA | |
| 3 months | +20.3% | −7.0% | +17.0 pts | −10.3 pts | +21.1 pts | −6.2 pts |
| 6 months | +1.2% | −6.5% | −14.8 pts | −22.5 pts | −19.5 pts | −27.2 pts |
| 1 year | +42.4% | +8.5% | +24.9 pts | −9.0 pts | +19.4 pts | −14.4 pts |
| 3 years | +284.5% | +100.5% | +206.6 pts | +22.6 pts | +189.4 pts | +5.4 pts |
| Since launch | +65.3% | +998.8% | −739.1 pts | +194.5 pts | −1608.6 pts | −675.1 pts |
| GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF Holds 110 stocks in miners and metals, 0% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF Holds 62 stocks in defense, 72% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | VanEck | Invesco |
| Theme | Miners and metals | Defense |
| In the S&P 500 | 0.0% | 71.8% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 100.0% | 96.4% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 0.0% | 4.9% |
| Holdings | 110 | 62 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 42.4% | 53.7% |
| Expense ratio | 0.52% | 0.58% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.52% | 0.60% |
| Total return, 1 year | +42.4% | +8.5% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +24.9 pts | −9.0 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | +19.4 pts | −14.4 pts |
| Below its high | −19.7% | −12.7% |
GDXJ in plain words
By weight, 0% of GDXJ'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 42% of the fund across 110 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +42.4% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 24.9 pts. It sits 19.7% below its all-time high of Feb 27, 2026.
PPA in plain words
By weight, 72% of PPA's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 96%. The top ten holdings are 54% of the fund across 62 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +8.5% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 9.0 pts. It sits 12.7% below its all-time high of Mar 2, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, GDXJ or PPA?
- GDXJ has 0% of its weight in S&P 500 names and PPA has 72%, so GDXJ differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, GDXJ or PPA?
- GDXJ charges 0.52% a year and PPA charges 0.58%, so GDXJ is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, GDXJ against PPA, data as of Sep 11, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/gdxj-vs-ppa Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.