BATT vs. URA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BATT (Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BATT is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund actively managed by Amplify, while URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. BATT is actively managed, while URA is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BATT returned 1.08%/yr vs 20.40%/yr for URA. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BATT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.

Performance

BATT vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BATT achieves a 14.35% return, which is significantly higher than URA's 6.67% return.

BATT

• 1D: -5.00%
• 1M: -5.57%
• YTD: 14.35%
• 6M: 13.17%
• 1Y: 80.97%
• 3Y*: 10.67%
• 5Y*: 1.08%
• 10Y*: —

URA

• 1D: -2.61%
• 1M: -6.90%
• YTD: 6.67%
• 6M: 2.57%
• 1Y: 27.21%
• 3Y*: 34.68%
• 5Y*: 20.40%
• 10Y*: 16.42%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BATT vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	14.35%	59.70%	-13.93%	-7.05%	-32.25%	16.52%	44.43%	-2.40%	-42.27%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	6.67%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	57.57%	41.33%	-3.54%	-17.91%

Correlation

The correlation between BATT and URA is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2018	0.56

The correlation between BATT and URA shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (3 years) to 0.65 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BATT vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BATT	URA
Basic Materials	58.7%	4.8%
Consumer Cyclical	18.0%	-
Industrials	16.8%	22.7%
Technology	5.1%	0.9%
Financial Services	0.3%	-
Communication Services	0.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	64.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	7.4%

Return for Risk

BATT vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BATT

BATT Risk / Return Rank: 77
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 69
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 82

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 19
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 19
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 18

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BATT vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BATT	URA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	0.53	+1.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.88	1.09	+1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.13	+0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.78	0.87	+3.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.62	1.87	+13.75

BATT vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BATT Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is higher than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BATT and URA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BATT vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BATT drawdown since its inception was -69.38%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BATT and URA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BATT	URA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.38%	-93.54%	+24.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.03%	-31.48%	+14.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-47.65%	-37.81%	-9.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.98%	-37.90%	-24.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-61.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.48%	-48.27%	+35.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.60%	-74.90%	+40.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.20%	14.58%	-9.38%

Volatility

BATT vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) is 12.72%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 17.86%. This indicates that BATT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BATT	URA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.72%	17.86%	-5.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.15%	39.53%	-12.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.69%	51.33%	-18.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.95%	43.92%	-13.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.76%	37.95%	-7.19%

BATT vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BATT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

BATT vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

BATT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, less than URA's 4.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	1.62%	1.85%	3.17%	3.23%	4.14%	2.32%	0.21%	3.22%	0.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.57%	4.88%	2.86%	6.07%	0.76%	5.84%	1.69%	1.66%	0.44%	2.03%	7.28%	1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BATT and URA in my portfolio?

BATT and URA have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BATT or URA?

URA has higher volatility (17.86%) compared to BATT (12.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BATT dropped -69.38% vs URA's -93.54%.

Which ETF is better, BATT or URA?

On 5-year performance, URA leads with 20.40% vs 1.08% for BATT. On fees, BATT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, BATT has been the lower-risk option at 12.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BATT or URA?

Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 20.40% return vs 1.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BATT or URA?

BATT is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BATT or URA?

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 1.62% for BATT.

What is the main difference between BATT and URA?

BATT is categorized as Lithium & Battery Metals, while URA is Uranium. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for BATT and 0.69% for URA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.49 vs 0.53), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.