T. Rowe Price T. Rowe Price Trusty Logo


Global Natural Resources Equity Fund

Seeking to identify long-term global winners in the arena of natural resources extraction and production.

ISIN LU0272423913 Bloomberg TRPGNRI:LX

3YR Return Annualised
(View Total Returns)

Total Assets


1YR Return
(View Total Returns)

Manager Tenure


Information Ratio
(5 Years)

Tracking Error
(5 Years)


Inception Date 15-Nov-2006

Performance figures calculated in USD

Other Literature

31-May-2020 - Shawn T. Driscoll, Portfolio Manager,
We believe we are in a secular bear market for commodities. In April, persistently high oil inventories briefly forced the price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil into negative territory, prompting producers to shut in wells and curtail drilling. In our view, oil prices could rebound sharply as demand normalises, although the trajectory depends on the pandemic’s duration. However, we expect WTI to settle in the mid-USD 40s per barrel over the long term.
Shawn T.  Driscoll
Shawn T. Driscoll, Portfolio Manager

Shawn Driscoll is a portfolio manager in the U.S. Equity Division of T. Rowe Price. He is the portfolio manager for the Global Natural Resources Strategy and is president and chairman of its Investment Advisory Committee. He is a vice president of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.

Click for Manager Outlook


Manager's Outlook

A massive wave of productivity gains and falling cost curves in U.S. shale began in 2011 and prompted a secular bear market in oil that has since extended to other commodities. Commodity cycles tend to last 15 to 20 years, on average, and we continue to believe there is more room for productivity to improve and the bear market to persist. The narrative of productivity-driven oil price deflation was exacerbated in early 2020 by dual demand and supply shocks hitting the market at precisely the wrong time, creating unprecedented pressure on the market's balance and driving crude prices to multiyear lows.

The global spread of the coronavirus effectively shut down many large economies around the world and sent oil demand negative for the first time since the 2008 global financial crisis. This negative demand shock, however, is likely to far exceed any weakness we have seen before in oil. Compounding the demand shock is a concurrent supply shock in the form of increased production out of Saudi Arabia after the failure of OPEC and other major oil-producing nations to agree to coordinated supply cuts in early March. The combined impacts of increasing supply and a precipitous drop in demand sent oil prices crashing through the cost curve as the market came to terms with the very real risk of hitting global inventory storage capacity if the environment persists.

The oil markets will be challenged in the short term, but the good news is that it should not take long to rebalance the market. While the timing of the demand recovery depends heavily on the duration of the coronavirus' impact on global economic activity, we believe the market is shaping up for a powerful move in energy stocks and commodities over the next 18 to 24 months as demand begins to normalize. Given the steeper decline rate exhibited by wells in shale plays, a rebalancing should occur reasonably quickly as rigs come offline and prices bottom before rebounding. Just as oil prices have shot through the cost curve on the way down, we would not be surprised to see them rebound above the incentive curve during the recovery phase.

Throughout this experience we have maintained our disciplined approach and remained extremely careful with "hidden leverage", or a dangerous spike in a company's debt caused by a meaningful decline in oil prices. This diligence has contributed to our strong competitive positioning. One anecdotal shift that has emerged from this environment is the decline of our energy allocation to its lowest level in our strategy's 51-year history. Lower values for energy assets certainly played a role, however our positioning also reflects a recognition that we want to be mindful of how and when to prepare the portfolio for the expected energy recovery. As we see indications that oil prices are bottoming, we are carefully adding back some exposure to names that exhibit higher beta to commodity prices, such as producers and equipment and services companies with quality assets and business models that should benefit from a recovery rally. This environment has created a compelling opportunity to take advantage of an unprecedented market anomaly; however, we firmly believe our longer-term view of a structural commodity bear market remains intact. We expect to retain considerable allocations to chemicals, utilities, and packaging, as these businesses should benefit from lower commodity prices. We also see meaningful opportunities in the paper and forest products industry, where we see the cost curve steepening to the advantage of low-cost producers that we believe are poised to benefit from rising prices.

We remain committed to our bottom-up stock selection process and our philosophy of buying and holding a diverse selection of fundamentally sound natural resources companies with solid balance sheets and talented management. Our expansive global research platform continues to assist in identifying those companies that can provide long-term capital appreciation for our clients, and we believe the market will reward our disciplined and consistent approach to investing over the long term.

Investment Objective

To increase the value of its shares, over the long term, through growth in the value of its investments. The fund invests mainly in a widely diversified portfolio of stocks of natural resources or commodities-related companies. The companies may be anywhere in the world, including emerging markets.

Investment Approach

  • Focus on well-managed companies that own or develop natural resources and other basic commodities with attractive long-term supply-demand fundamentals.
  • Invest in companies that operate “downstream” from these resources, e.g., refining, paper manufacturing, steel fabrication, and petrochemicals.
  • The portfolio invests in resource companies on a global basis including — international energy, forest products, mining, and commodities.
  • Assessment of resource/commodity cycle, industry valuation, and company fundamentals is key.
  • Broadly diversify holdings to manage portfolio risk profile relative to highly concentrated energy or gold strategies.

Portfolio Construction

  • Typically 90-120 securities
  • Positions typically range to 5%
  • Reserves typically range from 0% to 5%

Performance (Class I)

Annualised Performance

  1 YR 3 YR
5 YR
10 YR
Since Manager Inception
Fund % -14.85% -6.18% -4.35% -0.12% -3.55%
Indicative Benchmark % -18.21% -6.70% -4.91% 0.24% -4.19%
Excess Return % 3.36% 0.52% 0.56% -0.36% 0.64%

Inception Date 15-Nov-2006

Manager Inception Date 30-Sep-2013

Indicative Benchmark: MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index Net

Data as of  31-May-2020

Performance figures calculated in USD

  1 YR 3 YR
5 YR
10 YR
Fund % -33.50% -11.71% -7.19% -2.88%
Indicative Benchmark % -37.93% -13.37% -8.03% -2.80%
Excess Return % 4.43% 1.66% 0.84% -0.08%

Inception Date 15-Nov-2006

Indicative Benchmark: MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index Net

Data as of  31-Mar-2020

Performance figures calculated in USD

Recent Performance

  Month to DateData as of 02-Jul-2020 Quarter to DateData as of 02-Jul-2020 Year to DateData as of 02-Jul-2020 1 MonthData as of 31-May-2020 3 MonthsData as of 31-May-2020
Fund % 3.63% 3.63% -20.48% 2.99% -4.37%
Indicative Benchmark % 0.43% 0.43% -25.48% 4.19% -9.12%
Excess Return % 3.20% 3.20% 5.00% -1.20% 4.75%

Inception Date 15-Nov-2006

Indicative Benchmark: MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index Net

Indicative Benchmark: MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index Net

Performance figures calculated in USD

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.  Source for fund performance: T. Rowe Price. Fund performance is calculated using the official NAV with dividends reinvested, if any. The value of an investment and any income from it can go down as well as up. Investors may get back less than the amount invested. It will be affected by changes in the exchange rate between the base currency of the fund and the subscription currency, if different. Sales charges (up to a maximum of 5% for the A Class), taxes and other locally applied costs have not been deducted and if applicable, they will reduce the performance figures. 

Where the base currency of the fund differs from the share class currency, exchange rate movements may affect returns.

Index returns shown with reinvestment of dividends after the deduction of withholding taxes. 

Effective 1 July 2018, the "net" version of the indicative benchmark replaced the "gross" version of the indicative benchmark. The "net" version of the indicative benchmark assumes the reinvestment of dividends after the deduction of withholding taxes applicable to the country where the dividend is paid; as such, the returns of the new benchmark are more representative of the returns experienced by investors in foreign issuers. Historical benchmark performance has been restated accordingly. 

31-May-2020 - Shawn T. Driscoll, Portfolio Manager,
Commodity prices were mixed. WTI and Brent crude oil prices rebounded from their April lows, as declining oil output diminished the risk of a return to negative prices. U.S. natural gas prices gave back some of April’s double-digit gains on persistent oversupply. Gold prices edged higher, while silver and platinum prices also increased. Copper prices gained ground after miners in key producing countries kept their operations closed because of the coronavirus outbreak. Within the portfolio, our underweight position in diversified metals and mining hurt the most. Stocks in this industry rallied, supported by higher prices for iron ore as key economies started to reopen gradually and Chinese demand improved. Our above-benchmark allocation to oil and gas equipment and services also dragged, as concerns about the slowdown in oil and gas drilling and development because of elevated inventories weighed on many stocks in the industry. Conversely, our overweight position and stock selection in specialty chemicals added value. Shares of RPM International and Sherwin-Williams rallied, likely because these businesses tend to benefit from low energy prices and offer exposure to an economic recovery.


Largest Holding Total 6.31% Was (31-Dec-2019) 5.21%
Other View Full Holdings Quarterly data as of 31-Mar-2020
Top 10 Holdings 27.04% View Top 10 Holdings Monthly data as of 31-May-2020

Largest Top Contributor^

NextEra Energy
By 1.52%
% of fund 3.32%

Largest Top Detractor^

By -4.19%
% of fund 6.23%


Quarterly Data as of 31-Mar-2020

Top Purchase

NextEra Energy (N)
Was (31-Dec-2019) 0.00%

Top Sale

BP (E)
Was (31-Dec-2019) 2.76%

Quarterly Data as of 31-Mar-2020

31-Mar-2020 - Shawn T. Driscoll, Portfolio Manager,

Our bearish outlook for oil prices and belief that we are in the middle of a secular downcycle for commodities have not changed. Accordingly, we continue to favor defensive industries and areas of the natural resources universe, such as specialty chemicals, that we believe stand to benefit from lower commodity prices that reduce their input costs. The coronavirus pandemic and efforts to contain its spread have ground global economic activity to a halt and resulted in unprecedented demand destruction for crude oil and other commodities. These developments have completely changed the macro backdrop and opportunity set relative to where we were in the fourth quarter. We have begun adjusting to this new environment, with an eye on the next two to three years. So far, these efforts have focused on high-grading the portfolio by exiting lower-conviction and late-cycle ideas while adding to high-quality names that boast strong balance sheets, exhibit some leverage to commodity prices, and have the potential to do well in the early stages of a recovery. We also increased the portfolio's exposure to paper and forest products, an industry where we believe production cost curves are rising and the supply/demand outlook appears favorable. Although we are confident than energy stocks will rebound from current depressed levels, we plan to move slowly and selectively in positioning for this opportunity. As always, we remain conscious of valuation, industry fundamentals, and longer-term risk/reward propositions for the individual companies in which we invest.

Integrated Oil and Gas

We refined our positioning within in integrated oil and gas, an industry that historically has been a relative haven during energy bear markets because of the companies' scale, financial strength, and dividend yields. However, we believe the universe of so-called safety plays in the oil and gas investment universe has shrunk, as the challenges of moving the needle on production growth become more pronounced at size. We believe some majors' fascination with pursuing low-carbon ventures could distract their�management teams and dilute returns. We favor names that should be able to grow their hydrocarbon output in a cost-conscious manner and have exhibited a commitment to returning capital to shareholders.

  • We exited BP on concerns that its strategic goal of reaching net-zero carbon emissions could hamper returns. We are also skeptical of the decision to ramp up investment in renewables at a time when the cost curve for clean energy is declining rapidly and an abundance of inexpensive capital has intensified competition in this space.
  • We eliminated Occidental Petroleum in favor of other investment opportunities. In the current environment, we believe the Permian Basin-focused oil and gas producer faces heightened execution risk and challenges deleveraging after its controversial acquisition of Anadarko Petroleum.
  • We added to Chevron and Norway-based Equinor (formerly Statoil), names with solid�balance sheets and strong management teams�that we believe offer quality exposure to�oil beta. These are early-cycle stocks that we would like to own when we emerge from the current crisis.

Diversified Metals and Mining

We remained underweight the industry and defensively positioned with the metals and mining names held in the portfolio, focusing on companies with solid balance sheets and records of�sound capital allocation. Even before the coronavirus outbreak, we believed that a global oversupply of many base metals could be a headwind through much of what we regard as a secular bear market in commodities. Nevertheless, we have a favorable medium- to long-term outlook for copper prices because of the potential for demand to expand as adoption of electric vehicles grows.

  • We added to BHP, one of the largest diversified miners. The stock sold off and underperformed some of its peers on concerns about the company's exposure to crude oil and copper, a base metal whose price historically has exhibited sensitivity to the global economy's growth rate. We believe BHP's near-term price dislocation created an opportunity to add quality beta that could do well in the early stages of a recovery.
  • We initiated a position in OZ Minerals, an Australia-based miner that will ramp up copper production from a second project in 2020, setting the stage for a potential inflection in cash flow once this operation is running smoothly. We also like the company's strong development pipeline, which includes potential mining projects targeting copper, nickel, and cobalt.
  • We exited Teck Resources, a diversified miner that generates a meaningful proportion of its cash flow from metallurgical coal.

Paper and Forest Products

We increased the portfolio's allocation to this industry, with an emphasis on U.S. and European producers of containerboard, a commodity where we view the longer-term supply/demand outlook as favorable.

  • We initiated a position in Westrock and added to Packaging Corporation of America, two of the leading U.S. containerboard producers. Although we acknowledge that the macroeconomic challenges stemming from the coronavirus pandemic create near-term uncertainties for these companies, our long-term investment theses remain intact. We believe industry consolidation should help to moderate the cyclicality in containerboard pricing, while the increasing penetration of e-commerce and the trend toward paper-for-plastic substitution in packaging create long-term demand tailwinds.

Diversified Chemicals

We refined the portfolio's position in diversified chemicals to upgrade our exposure and emphasize our highest-conviction investment ideas.

  • We exited DuPont de Nemours, a specialty chemicals conglomerate spun out from the former DowDuPont, in favor of investments that we believe offer better risk/reward profiles.
  • We eliminated Eastman Chemical. Although we appreciate the relative resilience of the mid-cap chemical conglomerate's growing portfolio of specialty chemicals, recent market volatility has created more attractive risk/reward profiles elsewhere in our investment universe.
  • We initiated a position in Huntsman, a polyurethane company with a relatively clean balance sheet that we believe has improved the return profile of its underlying business mix by expanding its presence in downstream applications. In our view, Huntsman's growing portfolio of intermediate chemicals should generate more consistent returns through the cycle than its legacy operations, creating the potential for the stock to rerate to a higher valuation multiple as the market comes around to this change.

Oil and Gas Refining and Marketing

The portfolio remained underweight oil and gas refining and marketing, an industry that tends to do better toward the middle of�an economic cycle. The extent of the fuel demand destruction stemming from the global response to the coronavirus pandemic and its macroeconomic ramifications mean that refining stocks likely will not be a haven during this downcycle. In the intermediate term, we have concerns about potential supply-side risks stemming from Saudi Arabia's plans to add refining capacity.

  • We eliminated Valero Energy. Although we appreciate the U.S.-based independent refiner's flexibility to process a wide range of different crude grades and easy access to export markets from the Gulf Coast, we exited this position in favor of opportunities that we believe offer better risk/reward profiles.


Largest Sector Chemicals 19.29% Was (30-Apr-2020) 18.40%
Other View complete Sector Diversification

Monthly Data as of 31-May-2020

Indicative Benchmark: MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index

Largest Overweight

Fund 8.70%
Indicative Benchmark 3.23%

Largest Underweight

Energy Services & Processors
Fund 9.03%
Indicative Benchmark 22.52%

Monthly Data as of 31-May-2020

31-May-2020 - Shawn T. Driscoll, Portfolio Manager,
We continued to increase our exposure to paper and forest products, an industry where we believe production cost curves are rising and the supply/demand outlook appears favourable. In particular, we are finding opportunities among producers of containerboard and other paper-based packaging products. As always, we remain conscious of valuation, industry fundamentals, and longer-term risk/reward propositions for the individual companies in which we invest.


Largest Country United States 58.58% Was (30-Apr-2020) 58.80%
Other View complete Country Diversification

Monthly Data as of 31-May-2020

Indicative Benchmark: MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index

Largest Overweight

United States
Fund 58.58%
Indicative Benchmark 49.33%

Largest Underweight

Fund 0.58%
Indicative Benchmark 6.63%

Monthly Data as of 31-May-2020

31-Jul-2015 - Shawn T. Driscoll, Portfolio Manager,
From a country perspective, our allocation to Norway saw the largest percentage increase during the month of July. There were no notable reductions for the period.


Largest Currency U.S. dollar 64.55% Was (30-Apr-2020) 65.18%
Other View complete Currency Diversification

Monthly Data as of 31-May-2020

Indicative Benchmark : MSCI World Select Natural Resources Index

Largest Overweight

U.S. dollar
By 14.91%
Fund 64.55%
Indicative Benchmark 49.65%

Largest Underweight

Canadian dollar
By -9.89%
Fund 3.56%
Indicative Benchmark 13.46%

Monthly Data as of 31-May-2020

Team (As of 02-Jul-2020)

Shawn T.  Driscoll

Shawn Driscoll is a portfolio manager in the U.S. Equity Division of T. Rowe Price. He is the portfolio manager for the Global Natural Resources Strategy and is president and chairman of its Investment Advisory Committee. He is a vice president of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.

Mr. Driscoll has 16 years of investment experience, 13 of which have been with T. Rowe Price. Prior to joining the firm in 2006, he was employed by MTB Investment Advisors as an equity research analyst. He also worked for MPower Communications as an information technology project manager.

Mr. Driscoll earned a B.A. in economics and mathematics from the University of Rochester and an M.B.A. in finance and global business from New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business.

  • Fund manager
  • Years at
    T. Rowe Price
  • Years investment
Brian Dausch

Brian Dausch is a portfolio specialist in the U.S. Equity Division of T. Rowe Price. He is a member of the Global Natural Resources Equity, US Mid-Cap Growth Equity, US Small-Cap Growth Equity, QM US Small-Cap Growth Equity, and Health Sciences Strategy teams, working closely with institutional clients, consultants, and prospects. Mr. Dausch is a vice president of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.

Mr. Dausch has 22 years of investment experience, 21 of which have been at T. Rowe Price. He joined the firm in 1998; prior to his current position, he managed the U.S. Equity Portfolio Analysis Group. Mr. Dausch also served as an associate research analyst in the U.S. Equity Division in health care, specializing in biotechnology and pharmaceutical company research.

Mr. Dausch earned a B.S. in business administration, with a concentration in finance, from the University of Delaware. He also has earned the Chartered Financial Analyst designation.

  • Years at
    T. Rowe Price
  • Years investment

Fee Schedule

Share Class Minimum Initial Investment and Holding Amount (USD) Minimum Subsequent Investment (USD) Minimum Redemption Amount (USD) Sales Charge (up to) Investment Management Fee (up to) Ongoing Charges
Class A $1,000 $100 $100 5.00% 160 basis points 1.74%
Class I $2,500,000 $100,000 $0 0.00% 75 basis points 0.84%
Class Q $1,000 $100 $100 0.00% 75 basis points 0.92%

Please note that the Ongoing Charges figure is inclusive of the Investment Management Fee and is charged per annum.

Tap to dismiss


Latest Date Range
Audience for the document: Share Class: Language of the document:
Download Cancel


Share Class: Language of the document:
Download Cancel
Sign in to manage subscriptions for products, insights and email updates.
Continue with sign in?
To complete sign in and be redirected to your registered country, please select continue. Select cancel to remain on the current site.
Continue Cancel
Once registered, you'll be able to start subscribing.

By clicking the Continue button, I acknowledge that I have read and accepted the Privacy Notice

Continue Back

Change Details

If you need to change your email address please contact us.
You are ready to start subscribing.
Get started by going to our products or insights section to follow what you're interested in.

Products Insights

GIPS® Information

T. Rowe Price ("TRP") claims compliance with the Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). TRP has been independently verified for the twenty one- year period ended June 30, 2017 by KPMG LLP. The verification report is available upon request. Verification assesses whether (1) the firm has complied with all the composite construction requirements of the GIPS standards on a firm-wide basis and (2) the firm's policies and procedures are designed to calculate and present performance in compliance with the GIPS standards. Verification does not ensure the accuracy of any specific composite presentation.

TRP is a U.S. investment management firm with various investment advisers registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority, and other regulatory bodies in various countries and holds itself out as such to potential clients for GIPS purposes. TRP further defines itself under GIPS as a discretionary investment manager providing services primarily to institutional clients with regard to various mandates, which include U.S, international, and global strategies but excluding the services of the Private Asset Management group.

A complete list and description of all of the Firm's composites and/or a presentation that adheres to the GIPS® standards are available upon request. Additional information regarding the firm's policies and procedures for calculating and reporting performance results is available upon request

Other Literature

You have successfully subscribed.

Notify me by email when
regular data and commentary is available
exceptional commentary is available
new articles become available

Thank you for your continued interest