Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
GDXJ vs XT: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, GDXJ returned +14.8% to XT's +22.1%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about GDXJ and XT
Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $7.6bn for VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF and $4.1bn for iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF.
0% of GDXJ's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 100% is outside the index. Holdings as of Oct 22, 2026.
66% of XT's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 35% is outside the index. Holdings as of Oct 27, 2026.
Pair scorecard
XT costs 0.06 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 7.3 points; GDXJ is 1.9 times larger.
Points (pts) are percentage points.
| Measure | GDXJ | XT |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +14.8% | +22.1% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its all-time high | 33.1%, high on Feb 27, 2026 | |
| Against its benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | Gold miners | Broad innovation and megatrends |
| Its benchmark, total return, 1 year | +13.4% | +13.4% |
| Against its benchmark, 1 year | ahead by 1.4 pts | ahead by 8.7 pts |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.52% | 0.46% |
| Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 | $7.6bn | $4.1bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 0% | |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 27, 2026. Method
Risk and return
Apr 2, 2015 to Oct 23, 2026 · 603 weekly returns · each against ACWIGDXJ returned more: +392.9% to +292.0%. XT swung less: 19.0% to 42.2%. XT fell less at its worst: −34.3% to −54.1%.
Full scorecard
19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓
| Measure | GDXJ | XT | ACWI | Edge | How it is measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return | |||||
| Total return | +392.9% | +292.0% | GDXJ | Price change plus distributions, reinvested. | |
| Annualized | +14.7% | +12.5% | GDXJ | Total return as a yearly rate. | |
| Price return | +319.2% | +225.6% | GDXJ | Price change alone, distributions left out. | |
| Risk | |||||
| Volatility | 42.2% | 19.0% | XT | Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier. | |
| Downside deviation | 28.8% | 13.2% | XT | Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate. | |
| Max drawdown | −54.1% | −34.3% | XT | Deepest fall from a high to the low after it. | |
| Upside capture | 86.9% | 123.1% | 100.0% | XT | Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose. |
| Downside capture | 84.7% | 108.7% | 100.0% | GDXJ | Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better. |
| Beta | 0.94 | 1.11 | 1.00 | GDXJ lower | How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves. |
| R squared | 0.13 | 0.89 | 1.00 | Not an edge | Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains. |
| Risk-adjusted | |||||
| Sharpe | 0.49 | 0.60 | XT | Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility. | |
| Sortino | 0.72 | 0.87 | XT | Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation. | |
| Treynor | 0.221 | 0.103 | 0.092 | GDXJ | Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta. |
| Calmar | 0.27 | 0.36 | XT | Annualized return divided by the max drawdown. | |
| Against the benchmark | |||||
| Benchmark | ACWI | ACWI | ACWI | The ETF each fund is measured against. | |
| Alpha | +12.1% a year | +1.1% a year | 0.0% | Not significant | Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts. |
| Alpha t-stat | 1.04 | 0.61 | Not an edge | How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance. | |
| Alpha range | −10.7% to +34.9% | −2.5% to +4.7% | Both include zero | The 95% range for the yearly alpha. | |
| Information ratio | 0.29 | 0.33 | XT | Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error. | |
| Tracking error | 39.4% | 6.5% | 0.0% | Not an edge | How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized. |
Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 603 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, GDXJ and XT hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Oct 27, 2026.
half
0% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Window by window
| Total return | vs its benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | GDXJ | XT | GDXJ | XT |
| 3 months | +9.9% | +10.2% | +5.5 pts vs ACWI | +5.8 pts vs ACWI |
| 6 months | −8.0% | +14.0% | −15.4 pts vs ACWI | +6.6 pts vs ACWI |
| 1 year | +14.8% | +22.1% | +1.4 pts vs ACWI | +8.7 pts vs ACWI |
| 3 years | +220.2% | +93.2% | +131.3 pts vs ACWI | +4.3 pts vs ACWI |
| Since launchNot the same days: GDXJ Nov 2009 · XT Mar 2015 | +44.9% | +297.8% | not measured | +71.7 pts vs ACWI |
Side by side
As of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.
GDXJ and XT are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- Theme. GDXJ covers Gold miners and XT covers Broad innovation and megatrends.
- What each follows. GDXJ follows Gold miners and XT follows Broad innovation and megatrends.
- Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 27, 2026).
Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
GDXJ
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 41% of the fund across 156 positions, as published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 the fund returned +14.8% with distributions reinvested against +13.4% for its benchmark, the MSCI ACWI Index, so a holder was ahead by 1.4 pts. It sits 33.1% below its all-time high of Feb 27, 2026.
XT
By weight, 66% of XT's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 69%. The top ten holdings are 37% of the fund across 197 positions, as published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 the fund returned +22.1% with distributions reinvested against +13.4% for its benchmark, the MSCI All Country World Index, so a holder was ahead by 8.7 pts.
Questions people ask
- Do GDXJ and XT hold the same stocks?
- By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, GDXJ against XT, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/gdxj-vs-xt
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). GDXJ against XT. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/gdxj-vs-xt
[GDXJ against XT (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/gdxj-vs-xt)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.