PlainIndex

ETF comparison

FMAT vs GDX

Both Materials.

Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF · VanEck Gold Miners ETF

Holdings overlap

0.0 %

0 positions appear in both funds. Buying equal dollars of FMAT and GDX would leave roughly 0.0% of each dollar exposed to the same underlying securities.

FMAT only 0.0% Shared 0.0% GDX only 0.0%
In FMAT only
0 positions
Shared
0 positions
In GDX only
0 positions

Holdings data for FMAT covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.

Holdings data for GDX covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.

Side by side

FMAT

Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF

Fidelity · Materials

76 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.084%
Net assets
$603.2M
TTM yield
1.43%
Top-10 conc.
—
GDX

VanEck Gold Miners ETF

VanEck · Materials

72 composite / 100
Expense ratio
0.51%
Net assets
$27.26B
TTM yield
0.72%
Top-10 conc.
—

Sub-score comparison

92
Cost
49
80
Tax efficiency
83
47
Liquidity
100
N/A
Concentration
N/A
—
Tracking quality
—
FMAT sub-score GDX

Tracking-quality sub-score is not yet computed for any fund — see methodology for which inputs are live.

Cost difference

FMAT is 43 bps cheaper than GDX. On a $100,000 position that's about $426/yr more in fees for GDX.

Fee figure is the annual expense charged on $100,000. It compounds over time — we publish a fuller cost-projection calculator on the methodology page.

Top shared holdings

0 shared in total

No shared holdings between these funds.

Only in FMAT

0 total

Every FMAT position is also held by GDX.

Only in GDX

0 total

Every GDX position is also held by FMAT.

Holdings overlap is the sum of min(weight_a, weight_b) over positions matched on ISIN (CUSIP fallback). Methodology: see /methodology/.

Comparing two funds doesn't endorse swapping one for the other. Tax-lot history, account type, and personal goals matter — PlainIndex publishes data and methodology, not investment advice.