Data as of .
RING vs SETM: which is really different?
RING and SETM hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and RING returned more over the year.
ETFIQ Off-Index Score: RING 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, RING and SETM hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in RING | Only in SETM |
|---|---|
| NEWMONT 16.44% | Freeport-McMoRan Inc. 5.00% |
| AGNICO EAGLE MINES 12.41% | Cameco Corp. 4.91% |
| BARRICK MINING 8.27% | Lynas Rare Earths Ltd. 4.73% |
| WHEATON PRECIOUS METALS 7.65% | PLS Group Ltd. 4.05% |
| GOLD FIELDS 4.46% | NAC Kazatomprom JSC 3.57% |
| ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI PLC 4.36% | Hecla Mining Co. 3.46% |
| KINROSS GOLD 4.31% | First Majestic Silver Corp. 3.42% |
| COEUR MINING 3.41% | Albemarle Corp. 3.37% |
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 17, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RING | SETM | RING | SETM | RING | SETM | |
| 3 months | +17.9% | −9.0% | +15.6 pts | −11.3 pts | +20.3 pts | −6.5 pts |
| 6 months | +21.9% | +5.4% | +3.9 pts | −12.6 pts | −2.3 pts | −18.8 pts |
| 1 year | +45.3% | +37.9% | +28.7 pts | +21.4 pts | +23.5 pts | +16.2 pts |
| 3 years | +286.7% | +82.1% | +208.3 pts | +3.7 pts | +188.5 pts | −16.1 pts |
| Since launch | +97.9% | +61.6% | −543.5 pts | −30.1 pts | −1138.6 pts | −74.6 pts |
| RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF Holds 55 stocks in gold miners, 16% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF Holds 156 stocks in rare earth and critical materials, 8% of its weight in S&P 500 companies | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | iShares | Sprott |
| Theme | Gold miners | Rare earth and critical materials |
| In the S&P 500 | 16.4% | 8.4% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 99.8% | 99.8% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 55 | 156 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 67.0% | 39.0% |
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.65% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.39% | 0.65% |
| Total return, 1 year | +45.3% | +37.9% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +28.7 pts | +21.4 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | +23.5 pts | +16.2 pts |
| Below its high | −14.8% | −21.8% |
| Net assets | $2.5bn | $568m |
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 17, 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.
SETM in plain words
By weight, 8% of SETM'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 39% of the fund across 156 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 18, 2026. Over the year to Sep 18, 2026 the fund returned +37.9% with distributions reinvested against +16.6% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 21.4 pts. It sits 21.8% below its all-time high of Jan 28, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Do RING and SETM 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, RING or SETM?
- RING has 16% of its weight in S&P 500 names and SETM has 8%, so RING differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, RING or SETM?
- RING charges 0.39% a year and SETM charges 0.65%, 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, RING against SETM, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/ring-vs-setm Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.