Data as of .
NIKL vs RING: which is really different?
NIKL and RING hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and RING returned more over the year.
ETFIQ Off-Index Score: NIKL scores higher
How much of it is not the index it is sold as an alternative to?
A percentile among the 379 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
0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, NIKL and RING hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in NIKL | Only in RING |
|---|---|
| ANTAM Persero Tbk PT 14.86% | NEWMONT 16.36% |
| Nickel Industries Ltd. 11.93% | AGNICO EAGLE MINES 12.29% |
| Merdeka Battery Materials Tbk PT 11.52% | BARRICK MINING 8.16% |
| IGO Ltd. 8.25% | WHEATON PRECIOUS METALS 7.58% |
| Talon Metals Corp. 6.48% | GOLD FIELDS 4.35% |
| Vale Indonesia Tbk PT 4.75% | ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI PLC 4.28% |
| Trimegah Bangun Persada Tbk PT 4.62% | KINROSS GOLD 4.25% |
| Sunrise Energy Metals Ltd. 4.24% | COEUR MINING 3.38% |
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 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIKL | RING | NIKL | RING | NIKL | RING | |
| 3 months | +0.7% | +17.9% | −1.6 pts | +15.6 pts | +3.1 pts | +20.3 pts |
| 6 months | −1.4% | +21.9% | −19.4 pts | +3.9 pts | −25.6 pts | −2.3 pts |
| 1 year | +10.8% | +45.3% | −5.8 pts | +28.7 pts | −11.0 pts | +23.5 pts |
| 3 years | −7.1% | +286.7% | −85.5 pts | +208.3 pts | −105.3 pts | +188.5 pts |
| Since launch | −12.2% | +97.9% | −115.1 pts | −543.5 pts | −152.3 pts | −1138.6 pts |
| NIKL Sprott Nickel Miners ETF Holds 26 stocks in miners and metals, 0% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF Holds 55 stocks in gold miners, 16% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Sprott | iShares |
| Theme | Miners and metals | Gold miners |
| In the S&P 500 | 0.0% | 16.4% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 100.0% | 99.8% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 26 | 55 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 74.4% | 67.0% |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.39% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.75% | 0.39% |
| Total return, 1 year | +10.8% | +45.3% |
| vs the S&P 500 | −5.8 pts | +28.7 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | −11.0 pts | +23.5 pts |
| Below its high | −30.3% | −14.8% |
| Net assets | $57m | $2.5bn |
NIKL in plain words
By weight, 0% of NIKL'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 74% of the fund across 26 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 18, 2026. Over the year to Sep 18, 2026 the fund returned +10.8% with distributions reinvested against +16.6% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 5.8 pts. It sits 30.3% below its all-time high of Jan 26, 2026.
RING in plain words
By weight, 16% of RING'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 67% of the fund across 55 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 18, 2026. Over the year to Sep 18, 2026 the fund returned +45.3% with distributions reinvested against +16.6% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 28.7 pts. It sits 14.8% below its all-time high of Feb 27, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Do NIKL and RING hold the same stocks?
- By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight, which is mostly different names. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, NIKL or RING?
- NIKL has 0% of its weight in S&P 500 names and RING has 16%, so NIKL differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, NIKL or RING?
- NIKL charges 0.75% a year and RING charges 0.39%, so RING 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, NIKL against RING, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/nikl-vs-ring Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.