FTWO vs HAP: Grades, Fees and Holdings Compared

Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF

FTWODNYSE

VanEck Natural Resources ETF

HAPBNYSE Arca

Overlap

26.2%by weight

Expense ratio

HAP −0.08pt a year

FTWO0.49%HAP0.41%

Avg volume · 30D

HAP 4.5×the volume

FTWO6.23KHAP27.8K

3Y return · a year

FTWO +6.5pt

FTWO+24.3%HAP+17.8%

FTWO vs HAP Performance

Nov 3, 2025 – Nov 3, 2026

+13.4%FTWO+31.2%HAP

Expense ratio: FTWO 0.49%; HAP 0.41%, better
Fund size: FTWO $74M; HAP $321M
1Y total return: FTWO +13.4%; HAP +31.2%, better
Yield (12M): FTWO 0.94%; HAP 1.86%, better
Holdings: FTWO 52; HAP 130
Avg volume (30D): FTWO 6.23K sh; HAP 27.8K sh, better
NAV per share: FTWO $44.57; HAP $73.06
52W range

ETF.net Grade

Pillar letters and Scores for FTWO, HAP, with each pillar’s weight
Pillar	FTWO	HAP
Cost30% weight	D35	B68Higher
Mission25% weight	A74	Not scored
Risk15% weight	C43	A76Higher
Tradability15% weight	C40	B64Higher
Holdings10% weight	D32	A74Higher
Durability5% weight	D29	B60Higher

Rank among Natural Resources funds

How we build Categories ›

Same Category. FTWO and HAP are both graded against the same 14 Natural Resources funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Natural Resources⁠

Category · 14 funds

See all 14 ›

HAP ranks 4th and FTWO 10th of 14 funds in the Natural Resources Category.

Rank 1AGNRState Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETFScore 76
Rank 2AIGEiShares North American Natural Resources ETFScore 75
Rank 2ANANRState Street SPDR S&P North American Natural Resources ETFScore 75
Rank 4BHAPVanEck Natural Resources ETFScore 69
Rank 5BCCNRALPS Funds CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETFScore 63
Rank 9DCSNRCohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETFScore 38
Rank 10DFTWOStrive Natural Resources and Security ETFScore 36
Rank 11DMGNRAmerican Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETFScore 30

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

FTWODStrive Natural Resources and Security ETF

HAPBVanEck Natural Resources ETF

In short

FTWO An upstream-only take on natural resources: roughly 50 companies that drill, mine and grow the raw material, rather than the pipelines and processors further down the chain. A young fund priced above the category norm.

HAP Metals, energy and farm goods in one global basket. HAP has held hard-asset producers since 2008, spreading across roughly 150 companies worldwide rather than betting on one commodity or one continent.

Stated mandate

FTWO The fund invests primarily in upstream natural-resource companies involved in exploring, extracting, or developing resources. It normally commits at least 80% of net assets to companies engaged in extracting energy, minerals, and agricultural products.

HAP The fund seeks to track, before fees and expenses, the price and yield performance of the Market Vector Global Natural Resources Index, which covers global natural-resources companies involved in metals, energy sources, and agricultural products.

Why people hold it

FTWO The mandate is specific: normally at least 80% of net assets in companies extracting energy, minerals and agricultural products. Upstream, where commodity moves land first.
Roughly 50 holdings, so individual names carry real weight instead of being diluted across a sprawling basket.
Three resource legs in one wrapper: energy, minerals and agriculture, all at the extraction stage.
Distributions are paid on a quarterly schedule.

HAP Global by mandate, not North America only like IGE or NANR: it holds producers of metals, energy sources and agricultural products around the world.
Launched in 2008, so the fund has run through a full commodity boom and bust, not just the last good stretch.
About 150 holdings across three resource groups, so no single miner, driller or grain house runs the show.

Worth knowing

FTWO At 0.49% a year, it costs more than the category median and more than established rivals such as NANR (0.35%), IGE (0.37%) and GNR (0.40%).
It trades thinly next to the category's heavyweights, which makes wider bid-ask spreads more likely.
Launched in 2023 and still modest in size, it has a shorter record and a smaller asset base than the long-running funds it competes against.

HAP No price edge: the 0.41% fee lands exactly at the category median, and peers such as NANR (0.35%) and IGE (0.37%) charge less.
Thinly traded for its size, so spreads can run wider than in the category's busiest names.
Cash arrives once or twice a year, not quarterly or monthly.

Full FTWO profile⁠

Full HAP profile⁠

FTWO vs HAP Holdings

How FTWO and HAP differ

Overlap by weight

26.2%

Shared holdings make up 40.1% of FTWO and 26.6% of HAP.

Level by level

Holdings19 in both26.2%
Countryby domicile64.6%
Sector10 Sectors73.7%
Asset classEquity100%

Sector

Sector weights in FTWO and HAP, widest gap first
Sector	Gap	FTWO	HAP
Industrials	FTWO +22.7 points	33.5%	10.8%
Materials	HAP +9.7 points	22.4%	32.1%
Energy	HAP +6.4 points	28.1%	34.5%
Consumer Staples	HAP +5.0 points	1.0%	6.0%
Health Care	HAP +3.6 points	0.0%	3.6%
Utilities	FTWO +2.5 points	11.6%	9.1%
Financials	FTWO +1.0 points	3.4%	2.4%
Technology	HAP +0.8 points	0.0%	0.8%
Real Estate	HAP +0.5 points	0.0%	0.5%
Consumer Discretionary	HAP +0.2 points	0.0%	0.2%

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in FTWO and HAP, widest gap first
Country	Gap	FTWO	HAP
United States	FTWO +29.5 points	79.9%	50.4%
United Kingdom	HAP +6.7 points	0.0%	6.7%
Canada	FTWO +5.9 points	20.1%	14.2%
Spain	HAP +4.9 points	0.0%	4.9%
Australia	HAP +4.6 points	0.0%	4.6%
Germany	HAP +3.6 points	0.0%	3.6%
Japan	HAP +2.1 points	0.0%	2.1%
France	HAP +2.0 points	0.0%	2.0%
Other countries (15)	HAP +11.5 points	0.0%	11.5%

Outside the US: HAP 89% developed, 11% emerging.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

FTWO53.6%
HAP38.4%

Securities held

FTWO51
HAP124

Asset class

FTWO: Equity
HAP: Equity

Holdings

Only in FTWO32
In both19
Only in HAP105

Only in FTWO

32 securities, 59.9% of FTWO by weight

Constellation Energy Corp10.84%
Ge Aerospace5.46%
RTX Corp4.50%
Cameco Corp3.87%
Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd3.16%
Nutrien Ltd2.64%
Lockheed Martin Corp2.41%
Barrick Mining Corp2.29%
Boeing Co/The2.24%
Talen Energy Corp2.05%
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp1.99%
Franco-Nevada Corp1.61%
General Dynamics Corp1.55%
BWX Technologies Inc1.46%
Howmet Aerospace Inc1.44%
Canadian Nat Res Ltd1.34%
Enbridge Inc1.31%
Northrop Grumman Corp1.27%
Teck Resources Ltd1.09%
TransDigm Group Inc1.09%
Kinross Gold Corp0.87%
L3Harris Technologies Inc0.84%
Honeywell Aerospace Inc0.81%
NexGen Energy Ltd0.61%
Pan American Silver Corp0.59%
Mirion Technologies Inc0.53%
AGCO Corp0.52%
Uranium Energy Corp0.44%
Oklo Inc0.42%
First American Government Obligations Fund 12/01/20310.23%
Centrus Energy Corp0.21%
Energy Fuels Inc/Canada0.21%

Only in HAP

105 securities, 73.3% of HAP by weight

Deere & Co5.25%
Iberdrola Sa4.39%
Bayer Ag3.76%
Nextera Energy Inc3.66%
Bhp Group Ltd2.77%
Shell Plc2.49%
Nutrien Ltd2.20%
Totalenergies Se1.94%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co1.74%
Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd1.59%
Rio Tinto Plc1.49%
Bloom Energy Corp1.31%
Kubota Corp1.26%
Barrick Mining Corp1.17%
Bp Plc1.09%
Enbridge Inc1.00%
Tyson Foods Inc0.98%
Anglo American Plc0.96%
Mowi Asa0.87%
Suncor Energy Inc0.84%
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd0.83%
Vestas Wind Systems A/S0.79%
Reliance Industries Ltd0.79%
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp0.79%
Nucor Corp0.78%
Grupo Mexico Sab De Cv0.73%
Franco-Nevada Corp0.71%
Vale Sa0.69%
Bunge Global Sa0.69%
Eni Spa0.63%
Anglogold Ashanti Plc0.62%
Cameco Corp0.62%
Yara International Asa0.61%
Teck Resources Ltd0.60%
Wilmar International Ltd0.58%
Schlumberger Nv0.58%
Cheniere Energy Inc0.56%
Steel Dynamics Inc0.55%
Tc Energy Corp0.54%
Arcelormittal Sa0.53%
Rio Tinto Ltd0.51%
Edp Sa0.51%
Kinder Morgan Inc0.50%
Axia Energia Sa0.49%
First Solar Inc0.47%
Other0.47%
Gold Fields Ltd0.46%
Oneok Inc0.45%
Targa Resources Corp0.43%
Devon Energy Corp0.42%

Weight gaps

All 19 Holdings in both funds, largest gap first.

Holding weights in FTWO and HAP, widest gap first
Holding	Gap	FTWO	HAP
ExxonMobil Holdings CorpXOM	FTWO +3.27 points	9.10%	5.83%
Newmont CorpNEM	FTWO +2.60 points	4.23%	1.63%
Freeport-McMoRan IncFCX	FTWO +1.92 points	3.29%	1.37%
Vylor IncVYLR	FTWO +1.44 points	3.82%	2.38%
ConocoPhillipsCOP	FTWO +0.83 points	2.17%	1.34%
Marathon Petroleum CorpMPC	FTWO +0.65 points	1.53%	0.88%
Valero Energy CorpVLO	FTWO +0.61 points	1.41%	0.80%
EOG Resources IncEOG	FTWO +0.53 points	1.01%	0.48%
Phillips 66PSX	FTWO +0.53 points	1.34%	0.81%
Williams Cos Inc/TheWMB	FTWO +0.42 points	1.08%	0.66%
Chevron CorpCVX	HAP +0.37 points	5.30%	5.67%
First Quantum Minerals Ltd	FTWO +0.35 points	0.57%	0.22%
CF Industries Holdings IncCF	FTWO +0.29 points	1.41%	1.12%
Corteva IncCTVA	FTWO +0.24 points	0.63%	0.39%
CNH Industrial NVCNH	FTWO +0.12 points	0.80%	0.68%
Ingredion IncINGR	HAP +0.07 points	0.47%	0.54%
Toro Co/TheTTC	FTWO +0.06 points	0.80%	0.74%
Darling Ingredients IncDAR	FTWO +0.04 points	0.66%	0.62%
Mosaic Co/TheMOS	FTWO +0.01 points	0.46%	0.45%

All 52 FTWO holdings⁠All 146 HAP holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

FTWO vs HAP Cost

Overpaying FTWO vs HAP

$1,511

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

FTWO 0.49%
$9,792
HAP 0.41%
$8,281

Amount$10,000

Years30 years

Cost over time

FTWO 0.49%
HAP 0.41%
Overpaying

Year by year

Year	FTWO	HAP	Overpaying
10	$883	$741	$142
20	$3,394	$2,860	$534
30	$9,792	$8,281	$1,511

Expense ratio

0.49%FTWO
0.41%HAP, cheaper

HAP0.41%FTWO0.49%

0.35%0.79%

Middle half of Natural Resources funds
Median 0.46%

HAP 5th cheapest of 14 funds

FTWO 9th cheapest of 14 funds

FTWO vs HAP Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 3, 2026

Yield (12M): FTWO 0.94%; HAP 1.86%, better
Payout (12M): FTWO $0.42; HAP $1.36
Last payment: FTWO $0.13; HAP $1.36
Ex-dividend: FTWO Sep 28, 2026; HAP Dec 22, 2025
Paid on: FTWO Sep 30, 2026; HAP Dec 26, 2025
Frequency: FTWO Quarterly; HAP Annual

Distribution history

Per share, 2017 to 2026, same scale for both

FTWOQuarterly · 13 paymentsAll FTWO payments⁠

HAPAnnual · 9 paymentsAll HAP payments⁠

FTWO vs HAP Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years: FTWO 17.0%HAP 15.1%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years: FTWO 1.17, betterHAP 0.98
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years: FTWO −18.2%since Aug 2023HAP −25.7%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years: FTWO 0.65HAP 0.60; Market = 1

FTWO and HAP in the news

All news⁠

Filings Digest
11 Strive funds will move to NYSE Arca on Dec. 15
Oct 29, 2026FTWO

Popular comparisons

FTWODvsGNRA
Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF · State Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF
Expense ratio
0.49% · 0.40%
Category
HAPBvsGNRA
VanEck Natural Resources ETF · State Street SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF
Expense ratio
0.41% · 0.40%
Category
FTWODvsIGEA
Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF · iShares North American Natural Resources ETF
Expense ratio
0.49% · 0.37%
Category
HAPBvsIGEA
VanEck Natural Resources ETF · iShares North American Natural Resources ETF
Expense ratio
0.41% · 0.37%
Category
FTWODvsNANRA
Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF · State Street SPDR S&P North American Natural Resources ETF
Expense ratio
0.49% · 0.35%
Category
HAPBvsNANRA
VanEck Natural Resources ETF · State Street SPDR S&P North American Natural Resources ETF
Expense ratio
0.41% · 0.35%
Category

FTWO vs HAP

In short

Stated mandate

Why people hold it

Worth knowing

How FTWO and HAP differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in FTWO

Only in HAP

Weight gaps

Cost over time

Year by year

Distribution history

Fall from peak · 5 years

Risk facts

11 Strive funds will move to NYSE Arca on Dec. 15

How FTWO and HAP differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in FTWO

Only in HAP

Weight gaps