CCNR vs. URAN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CCNR (ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF) and URAN (Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds. CCNR is actively managed, while URAN is passively managed. Over the past year, CCNR returned 69.09% vs 27.41% for URAN. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CCNR charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for URAN.

Performance

CCNR vs. URAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) and Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF (URAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCNR achieves a 27.07% return, which is significantly higher than URAN's 3.99% return.

CCNR

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 0.24%
• YTD: 27.07%
• 6M: 29.27%
• 1Y: 69.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

URAN

• 1D: -1.13%
• 1M: -6.05%
• YTD: 3.99%
• 6M: -2.71%
• 1Y: 27.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CCNR vs. URAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	27.07%	46.48%	-8.17%
URAN Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF	3.99%	49.05%	4.09%

Correlation

The correlation between CCNR and URAN is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2024	0.48

Return for Risk

CCNR vs. URAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

CCNR

CCNR Risk / Return Rank: 95
CCNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CCNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
CCNR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CCNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CCNR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

URAN

URAN Risk / Return Rank: 22
URAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
URAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
URAN Omega Ratio Rank: 22
URAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
URAN Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

CCNR vs. URAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) and Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF (URAN). 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.

	CCNR	URAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.92	0.70	+3.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.75	1.21	+3.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.14	+0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.73	1.09	+9.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	34.92	2.15	+32.77
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CCNR vs. URAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCNR Sharpe Ratio is 3.92, which is higher than the URAN Sharpe Ratio of 0.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCNR and URAN, 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

	CCNR	URAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.92	0.70	+3.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.66	0.84	+0.82

Drawdowns

CCNR vs. URAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCNR drawdown since its inception was -20.06%, smaller than the maximum URAN drawdown of -31.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCNR and URAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCNR	URAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.06%	-31.96%	+11.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.47%	-25.31%	+18.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.21%	-21.06%	+19.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.56%	-10.78%	+7.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.98%	12.78%	-10.80%

Volatility

CCNR vs. URAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) is 4.18%, while Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF (URAN) has a volatility of 12.30%. This indicates that CCNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CCNR	URAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.18%	12.30%	-8.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.76%	29.33%	-16.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	39.36%	-21.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.83%	39.09%	-19.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.83%	39.09%	-19.26%

CCNR vs. URAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCNR has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than URAN's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CCNR vs. URAN - Dividend Comparison

CCNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.74%, more than URAN's 2.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	2.74%	3.48%	1.27%
URAN Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF	2.46%	2.56%	0.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCNR and URAN in my portfolio?

CCNR and URAN have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CCNR or URAN?

URAN has higher volatility (12.30%) compared to CCNR (4.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCNR dropped -20.06% vs URAN's -31.96%.

Which ETF is better, CCNR or URAN?

On 1-year performance, CCNR leads with 69.09% vs 27.41% for URAN. On fees, URAN is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CCNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CCNR or URAN?

Over the 1-year period, CCNR has performed better with a 69.09% return vs 27.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CCNR or URAN?

URAN is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for CCNR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CCNR or URAN?

CCNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.74%, compared with 2.46% for URAN.

What is the main difference between CCNR and URAN?

They also come from different issuers: ALPS and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for CCNR and 0.35% for URAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CCNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.92 vs 0.70), 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.