BBH vs. NLR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BBH (VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BBH is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Biotech 25 Index, while NLR is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, BBH returned 5.75%/yr vs 13.66%/yr for NLR. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BBH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

BBH vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BBH achieves a -1.85% return, which is significantly lower than NLR's 6.14% return. Over the past 10 years, BBH has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 5.75%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 13.66% annualized return.

BBH

• 1D: 2.22%
• 1M: 0.09%
• YTD: -1.85%
• 6M: -5.32%
• 1Y: 23.92%
• 3Y*: 6.14%
• 5Y*: 0.31%
• 10Y*: 5.75%

NLR

• 1D: -4.59%
• 1M: -8.11%
• YTD: 6.14%
• 6M: 1.51%
• 1Y: 36.84%
• 3Y*: 35.11%
• 5Y*: 21.94%
• 10Y*: 13.66%

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

BBH vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BBH VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF	-1.85%	21.18%	-4.29%	3.94%	-15.25%	11.81%	22.13%	26.34%	-10.70%	16.46%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	6.14%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.29%	13.63%	3.49%	0.20%	4.94%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between BBH and NLR is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.26
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2007	0.36

The correlation between BBH and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (1 year) to 0.36 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BBH vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BBH	NLR
Healthcare	99.9%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	46.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	15.1%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	1.5%
Utilities	-	37.4%

Return for Risk

BBH vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BBH

BBH Risk / Return Rank: 37
BBH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
BBH Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
BBH Omega Ratio Rank: 33
BBH Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
BBH Martin Ratio Rank: 37

NLR

NLR Risk / Return Rank: 25
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 24
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

BBH vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). 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.

	BBH	NLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.26	0.88	+0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.89	1.43	+0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.17	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	1.43	+0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.81	2.93	+2.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BBH vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BBH Sharpe Ratio is 1.26, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BBH and NLR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BBH	NLR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.26	0.88	+0.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.01	0.75	-0.74
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.26	0.57	-0.31
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.18	+0.21

Drawdowns

BBH vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBH drawdown since its inception was -72.70%, which is greater than NLR's maximum drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBH and NLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BBH	NLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.70%	-65.05%	-7.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.55%	-25.80%	+15.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.74%	-30.48%	+7.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.86%	-30.48%	-9.38%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.86%	-34.35%	-5.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.81%	-19.80%	+5.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.75%	-35.72%	+14.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.13%	12.61%	-8.48%

Volatility

BBH vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) is 6.06%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that BBH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BBH	NLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.06%	13.18%	-7.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.28%	32.83%	-18.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.02%	42.32%	-23.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.50%	29.24%	-7.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.17%	24.02%	-1.85%

BBH vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BBH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

BBH vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

BBH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than NLR's 2.40% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BBH VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF	0.51%	0.51%	0.80%	0.43%	0.47%	0.21%	0.36%	0.34%	0.50%	0.55%	0.30%	0.27%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	2.40%	2.55%	0.76%	4.54%	2.02%	1.99%	2.23%	2.21%	3.91%	4.86%	3.62%	3.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BBH and NLR in my portfolio?

BBH and NLR have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BBH or NLR?

NLR has higher volatility (13.18%) compared to BBH (6.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BBH dropped -72.70% vs NLR's -65.05%.

Which ETF is better, BBH or NLR?

On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 13.66% vs 5.75% for BBH. On fees, BBH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BBH has been the lower-risk option at 6.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BBH or NLR?

Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 13.66% return vs 5.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BBH or NLR?

BBH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BBH or NLR?

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.51% for BBH.

What is the main difference between BBH and NLR?

BBH is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. BBH tracks MVIS US Listed Biotech 25 Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BBH and 0.56% for NLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BBH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.26 vs 0.88), 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.