BITS vs. URA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BITS (Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BITS is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the NONE, while URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BITS returned 41.04%/yr vs 34.68%/yr for URA. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BITS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.

Performance

BITS vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) 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, BITS achieves a -1.05% return, which is significantly lower than URA's 6.67% return.

BITS

• 1D: -2.95%
• 1M: -9.90%
• YTD: -1.05%
• 6M: -4.96%
• 1Y: 16.16%
• 3Y*: 41.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 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)

BITS vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	-1.05%	14.90%	61.84%	212.23%	-75.46%	-28.96%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	6.67%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	-18.21%

Correlation

The correlation between BITS and URA is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2021	0.46

The correlation between BITS and URA shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (3 years) to 0.60 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BITS vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BITS

BITS Risk / Return Rank: 13
BITS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
BITS Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
BITS Omega Ratio Rank: 15
BITS Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
BITS Martin Ratio Rank: 11

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.

BITS vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) 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.

	BITS	URA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.31	0.53	-0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.78	1.09	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.13	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	0.87	-0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.60	1.87	-1.27

BITS vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BITS Sharpe Ratio is 0.31, which is lower than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BITS 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

BITS vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BITS drawdown since its inception was -83.11%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BITS and URA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BITS	URA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.11%	-93.54%	+10.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-48.38%	-31.48%	-16.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.38%	-37.81%	-10.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-37.90%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-61.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-34.86%	-48.27%	+13.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.63%	-74.90%	+32.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	26.82%	14.58%	+12.24%

Volatility

BITS vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) is 14.66%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 17.86%. This indicates that BITS 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

	BITS	URA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.66%	17.86%	-3.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.96%	39.53%	+1.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	53.22%	51.33%	+1.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.86%	43.92%	+16.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	60.86%	37.95%	+22.91%

BITS vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BITS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

BITS vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

BITS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 23.04%, more than URA's 4.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	23.04%	22.80%	29.49%	13.69%	0.48%	1.90%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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 BITS and URA in my portfolio?

BITS and URA have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BITS or URA?

URA has higher volatility (17.86%) compared to BITS (14.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BITS dropped -83.11% vs URA's -93.54%.

Which ETF is better, BITS or URA?

On 3-year performance, BITS leads with 41.04% vs 34.68% for URA. On fees, BITS is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, BITS has been the lower-risk option at 14.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BITS or URA?

Over the 3-year period, BITS has performed better with a 41.04% return vs 34.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BITS or URA?

BITS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

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

BITS has the higher dividend yield at 23.04%, compared with 4.57% for URA.

What is the main difference between BITS and URA?

BITS is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while URA is Uranium. BITS tracks NONE, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BITS and 0.69% for URA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.53 vs 0.30), 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.