VanEck Gold Miners ETF vs Betashares Energy Transition Metals ETF
Overlap is estimated from the funds' listed top holdings, not their full constituent lists. Where there are no shared listed holdings it is shown as not reliably estimable.
GDX and XMET are both Thematic ETFs. GDX tracks the NYSE Arca Gold Miners Index and XMET tracks the Solactive Global Copper Miners Index. GDX has the lower management fee (0.53% vs 0.59% p.a.). Holdings overlap is approximately 4% estimated (top 47 holdings).
VanEck Gold Miners ETF
VanEck
Betashares Energy Transition Metals ETF
BetaShares
Comparison scores reflect how each ETF compares to the other on these specific dimensions only. They are not absolute ratings or recommendations.
Key differences at a glance
Neither GDX nor XMET is the "right" pick for everyone; it comes down to what you want from the holding. Where they differ most:
Category scores compare these two ETFs only and are not absolute ratings.
GDX has the lower management fee - the one objective "cheaper" axis.
GDX is the larger fund. Larger is not inherently better, but greater scale can support tighter spreads and lower closure risk.
GDX spreads exposure across more holdings (GDX 108, XMET 40); the other is more concentrated. Neither is inherently better - it depends on whether you want breadth or a focused tilt.
GDX distributes approximately 0.7% and XMET approximately 1.5%; XMET carries the higher estimated distribution yield. A higher yield may suit an income focus; a lower one may suit a growth or tax-efficiency focus. Yields are estimates and are not guaranteed; past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Green highlights the factually lower fee or higher scale/income figure. Performance is never highlighted. Data from issuer disclosures, reviewed quarterly.
Yield figures are estimates based on recent distributions and may vary. Past distributions are not a reliable indicator of future distributions.
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns.
Top shared holdings ranked by overlap contribution, the smaller of each company's weight in the two funds. Basis: top 47 holdings.
Top 10 listed holdings for each fund, from issuer disclosures.
GDX top holdings
XMET top holdings
Based on each fund's most recently published sector and geographic weightings; figures are approximate. Full breakdowns are shown below.
GDX sectors
XMET sectors
GDX geography
XMET geography
Whether GDX or XMET fits comes down to your goals, time horizon and what you already hold. The clearest differences are summarised near the top of this page, with the full data below.
GDX and XMET have approximately 4% estimated holdings overlap (top 47 holdings). This is considered low overlap, estimated from listed top holdings rather than the full constituent lists.
GDX has the lower management fee. GDX charges 0.53% per year ($53 per year on a $10,000 investment) and XMET charges 0.59% per year ($59 per year on a $10,000 investment). The difference is $6 per year per $10,000 invested.
GDX (VanEck Gold Miners ETF) manages approximately $1.1B and XMET (Betashares Energy Transition Metals ETF) manages approximately $130.1M. Fund size can affect liquidity and bid-ask spreads but does not by itself change the management fee.
You can hold both, but with approximately 4% estimated holdings overlap the two funds hold mostly different companies, so they can be more complementary. Whether that suits you depends on your own objectives.
There is no universally right choice. It depends on your goals, time horizon and existing holdings. GDX charges 0.53% and XMET charges 0.59%, so GDX has the lower management fee, and they have approximately 4% estimated holdings overlap. Compare their fees, holdings and sectors above and consider each fund's Product Disclosure Statement and Target Market Determination.
General information only. This comparison and the ETFLens tools on this page provide general information about two exchange-traded funds and do not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not personal financial product or investment advice. ETFLens does not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). Holdings overlap is calculated from each fund's published holdings (full lists where the issuer publishes one, listed top holdings otherwise), and fee data is sourced from fund manager PDS documents and updated quarterly. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns. Consider each fund's Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) and Target Market Determination (TMD), and seek advice from a registered tax agent or licensed financial adviser, before making investment decisions.
Check your portfolio overlap
See how these ETFs interact with your other holdings.
Open overlap checker →Build your portfolio
ProModel a portfolio with these ETFs and see projected fees and income.
Build a portfolio →View full ETF profiles
Holdings, fees, sectors and distributions for each fund.
GDX full profile →XMET full profile →Compare another pair
Enter any two ASX ETF tickers to see their side-by-side comparison.
Compare other ETFs →