GGN vs ZJAN
GAMCO Global Gold Natural Resources & Income Trust vs Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr January
Which is better, GGN or ZJAN?
Each has led over a different period.
ZJAN has a lower expense ratio. GGN led over the full window, ZJAN over 1Y.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GGN | ZJAN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.40% | 0.79%Best |
| AUM | $1.0B | $109M |
| Dividend Yield | 6.14% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 221 | 15 |
| YTD Return | +2.85% | +3.98%Best |
| 1Y Return | +5.08% | +5.91%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.86% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.43% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.7% | 2.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -18.3% | -3.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $14,876Best | $11,130 |
| Fund Family | Gabelli Funds | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 29, 2005 | Jan 2, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 2, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
GGN vs ZJAN growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.8 years both funds cover.
GGN vs ZJAN Performance
GAMCO Global Gold Natural Resources & Income Trust (GGN) is an ETF from Gabelli Funds and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr January (ZJAN) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year GGN returned +5.08% while ZJAN returned +5.91%. Year to date, GGN is up 2.85% versus a gain of 3.98% for ZJAN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GGN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.7% compared with 2.4% for ZJAN. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -18.3% for GGN and -3.2% for ZJAN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.09. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GGN charges 1.40% per year while ZJAN charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $140 vs $79 annually, a gap of $61 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GGN currently yields 6.14% against 0.00% for ZJAN.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of GGN and ZJAN you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GGN or ZJAN?
GGN has an expense ratio of 1.40% while ZJAN charges 0.79%. ZJAN is the cheaper option, by $61 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GGN or ZJAN?
Over the past year GGN returned +5.08% vs +5.91% for ZJAN, so ZJAN leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GGN annualized +24.69% vs +6.13% for ZJAN. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GGN or ZJAN?
GGN has been the more volatile fund at 21.7% annualized versus 2.4% for ZJAN. Worst drawdown: GGN -18.3% vs ZJAN -3.2%.
Should I hold both GGN and ZJAN?
GGN and ZJAN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.09, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, GGN or ZJAN?
GGN yields 6.14% while ZJAN yields 0.00%, so GGN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ZJAN better than GGN?
ZJAN has a lower expense ratio. GGN led over the full window, ZJAN over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.