Best Materials Sector ETFs
Chemicals, metals, and mining — the raw inputs of the economy
ETFs tracked
72
Avg TER
0.61%
Median CAGR 3Y
+21.5%
Materials sector ETFs hold chemicals companies, metal producers, mining firms, and paper & packaging. XLB, the largest broad fund, yields around 1.8% with top holdings in Linde (industrial gases), Sherwin-Williams (paints), and Ecolab (specialty chemicals). Narrower slices like COPX target copper miners, GDX focuses on gold miners, and LIT concentrates on lithium and battery materials.
The sector is cyclical and commodity-linked. When global industrial activity rises, demand for steel, copper, and chemicals rises with it. When recessions hit, earnings compress fast. Broad materials ETFs have historically tracked industrial production cycles more closely than any other sector. XLB fell 38% in 2008 and lost 27% peak-to-trough in 2022 as global growth concerns dominated.
Sub-sector composition varies widely. XLB is about 70% chemicals and 15% packaging, with only 10% in metals and mining. Dedicated mining funds (XME, COPX) are the opposite: essentially pure metals exposure. This matters because chemicals companies have specialty pricing power that miners don't — Linde's earnings are more stable than Rio Tinto's. A "materials ETF" can mean very different economic exposure depending on composition.
Thematic plays within materials around lithium (LIT), uranium (URA), and rare earths (REMX) have become meaningful sub-categories since 2020. The thesis is capital-spending cycles tied to electrification, AI data centers, and defense demand. These funds have outperformed broad materials during electric vehicle and energy transition rallies, but they're narrower bets with higher volatility than broad-sector ETFs.
Who this is for
- Investors with a cyclical or commodity view wanting equity exposure to materials demand
- Thematic allocators betting on electrification or infrastructure spending
- Not suitable for drawdown-sensitive investors — the sector fell 38% in 2008
Top 10 ETFs
| # | Ticker | CAGR 3Y | Vol 1Y | Max DD | TER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +11.5% | 16.43% | -37.3% | 0.08% | |
| 2 | +12.4% | 17.20% | -41.1% | 0.09% | |
| 3 | +35.5% | 32.97% | -61.7% | 0.35% | |
| 4 | +10.4% | 29.28% | -52.1% | 0.38% | |
| 5 | +39.4% | 45.00% | -49.8% | 0.51% | |
| 6 | +44.9% | 45.65% | -52.0% | 0.39% | |
| 7 | +45.6% | 49.47% | -57.8% | 0.51% | |
| 8 | +19.0% | 26.23% | -52.7% | 0.39% | |
| 9 | +12.3% | 17.17% | -41.1% | 0.08% | |
| 10 | +14.1% | 18.04% | -42.8% | 0.38% |
Browse all 72 materials ETFs
Filter, sort, and compare in the Beacon screener
Open screenerFrequently asked questions
- What is in a materials sector ETF?
- Broad materials ETFs (XLB, VAW) hold industrial gas companies (Linde, Air Products), specialty chemicals (Sherwin-Williams, Ecolab), packaging, and a smaller allocation to metals and mining. Narrower funds target sub-sectors — XME and COPX for mining, LIT for lithium, URA for uranium.
- Are materials stocks cyclical?
- Yes. Earnings correlate with global industrial activity, commodity prices, and capital-spending cycles. Materials ETFs fell 38% in 2008 and 27% in 2022. They tend to outperform during early-cycle expansions when manufacturing demand rebounds and underperform in late-cycle or recessionary environments.
- How are chemicals different from mining in a materials ETF?
- Specialty chemicals companies have pricing power on proprietary products and relatively stable margins. Miners produce fungible commodities and earn whatever global markets pay — margins swing dramatically with commodity cycles. A chemicals-heavy broad ETF (XLB) behaves very differently from a mining ETF (XME).
- Are lithium and uranium ETFs worth holding?
- They're thematic bets. Lithium (LIT) and uranium (URA) have rallied on electrification and nuclear-capacity stories but are highly volatile. These funds can deliver outsized gains during capacity-buildout cycles and substantial losses during oversupply periods. Size small if held; these are tactical, not core, allocations.
Related Sector