BRF vs. NLR

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

BRF (VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BRF is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, BRF returned 5.74%/yr vs 12.50%/yr for NLR. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BRF charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

BRF vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) 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, BRF achieves a 1.84% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -5.48% return. Over the past 10 years, BRF has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 5.74%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 12.50% annualized return.

BRF

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -7.82%
• YTD: 1.84%
• 6M: 3.81%
• 1Y: 16.85%
• 3Y*: 1.46%
• 5Y*: -4.10%
• 10Y*: 5.74%

NLR

• 1D: -1.72%
• 1M: -12.79%
• YTD: -5.48%
• 6M: -8.75%
• 1Y: 10.82%
• 3Y*: 29.67%
• 5Y*: 19.89%
• 10Y*: 12.50%

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

BRF vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BRF VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF	1.84%	54.17%	-35.02%	37.21%	-14.38%	-20.40%	-21.07%	40.66%	-12.07%	54.63%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	-5.48%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.29%	13.63%	3.49%	0.20%	4.94%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between BRF and NLR is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2009	0.42

BRF vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BRF	NLR
Real Estate	14.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	13.9%	-
Basic Materials	13.4%	-
Industrials	13.2%	15.1%
Consumer Defensive	9.8%	-
Utilities	9.5%	38.1%
Financial Services	9.0%	-
Healthcare	5.7%	-
Energy	5.4%	45.3%
Technology	4.4%	1.6%
Communication Services	-	-

Return for Risk

BRF vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BRF

BRF Risk / Return Rank: 20
BRF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
BRF Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
BRF Omega Ratio Rank: 19
BRF Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
BRF Martin Ratio Rank: 21

NLR

NLR Risk / Return Rank: 13
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 13
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

BRF vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) 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.

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.

	BRF	NLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.59	0.25	+0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.97	0.66	+0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.08	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.88	0.37	+0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.38	0.77	+1.61

BRF vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BRF Sharpe Ratio is 0.59, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BRF 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.

Drawdowns

BRF vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRF drawdown since its inception was -82.26%, which is greater than NLR's maximum drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRF and NLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BRF	NLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.26%	-65.05%	-17.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.29%	-29.72%	+10.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.81%	-30.48%	-7.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-49.24%	-30.48%	-18.76%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-60.43%	-34.35%	-26.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.35%	-28.58%	-21.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-45.74%	-35.68%	-10.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.09%	14.05%	-6.96%

Volatility

BRF vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) is 7.88%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.33%. This indicates that BRF 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

	BRF	NLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.88%	13.33%	-5.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.42%	32.82%	-9.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.86%	42.83%	-13.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.69%	29.66%	+2.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.87%	24.27%	+9.60%

BRF vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRF has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

BRF vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

BRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.44%, more than NLR's 2.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BRF VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF	5.44%	5.54%	4.08%	5.02%	4.13%	2.96%	1.66%	2.54%	2.89%	4.53%	4.25%	3.84%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	2.70%	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 BRF and NLR in my portfolio?

BRF and NLR have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BRF or NLR?

NLR has higher volatility (13.33%) compared to BRF (7.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BRF dropped -82.26% vs NLR's -65.05%.

Which ETF is better, BRF or NLR?

On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 12.50% vs 5.74% for BRF. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, BRF has been the lower-risk option at 7.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BRF or NLR?

Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 12.50% return vs 5.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BRF or NLR?

NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BRF.

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

BRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.44%, compared with 2.70% for NLR.

What is the main difference between BRF and NLR?

BRF is categorized as Latin America Equities, while NLR is Uranium. BRF tracks MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BRF and 0.56% for NLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BRF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.59 vs 0.25), 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.