Screener
GPZ vs MOO
VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETF vs VanEck Agribusiness ETF
Key differences
- GPZ costs 0.16% less per year.
- MOO is significantly larger than GPZ — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- MOO has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| GPZ | MOO | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.40% | 0.56% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $245M | $1.2B |
| Since | 2025 | 2007 |
| Dividend yield | — | 2.15% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +14.3% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +2.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | -0.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.01 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 13.89% |
| Max drawdown | -31.72% | -39.52% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to GPZ and MOO
Explore further