CEFA vs. URA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CEFA (Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the S&P Developed ex-U.S. Catholic Values Index, while URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFA returned 6.74%/yr vs 20.40%/yr for URA. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.

Performance

CEFA vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) 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, CEFA achieves a 7.16% return, which is significantly higher than URA's 6.67% return.

CEFA

• 1D: -2.25%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 7.16%
• 6M: 6.74%
• 1Y: 20.65%
• 3Y*: 15.05%
• 5Y*: 6.74%
• 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)

CEFA vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CEFA Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF	7.16%	26.46%	5.03%	17.40%	-16.66%	7.97%	21.61%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	6.67%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	57.57%	42.88%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFA and URA is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2020	0.47

CEFA vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CEFA	URA
Financial Services	24.0%	-
Industrials	16.5%	22.7%
Technology	12.8%	0.9%
Healthcare	9.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	-
Basic Materials	5.8%	4.8%
Energy	3.7%	64.2%
Communication Services	3.2%	-
Utilities	2.9%	7.4%
Real Estate	1.0%	-

Return for Risk

CEFA vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFA

CEFA Risk / Return Rank: 39
CEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
CEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
CEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 38
CEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
CEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

CEFA vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) 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.

	CEFA	URA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.29	0.53	+0.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	1.09	+0.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.13	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.80	0.87	+0.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.57	1.87	+4.70

CEFA vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is higher than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFA 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

CEFA vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.97%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFA and URA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFA	URA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.97%	-93.54%	+61.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.54%	-31.48%	+19.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.45%	-37.81%	+22.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.97%	-37.90%	+5.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-61.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.29%	-48.27%	+45.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.00%	-74.90%	+67.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.15%	14.58%	-11.43%

Volatility

CEFA vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) is 5.65%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 17.86%. This indicates that CEFA 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

	CEFA	URA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	17.86%	-12.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.62%	39.53%	-25.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.03%	51.33%	-35.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.73%	43.92%	-26.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.27%	37.95%	-20.68%

CEFA vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFA vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

CEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%, less than URA's 4.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CEFA Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF	2.67%	2.86%	3.26%	2.35%	2.35%	3.49%	0.84%	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 CEFA and URA in my portfolio?

CEFA and URA have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CEFA or URA?

URA has higher volatility (17.86%) compared to CEFA (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFA dropped -31.97% vs URA's -93.54%.

Which ETF is better, CEFA or URA?

On 5-year performance, URA leads with 20.40% vs 6.74% for CEFA. On fees, CEFA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CEFA has been the lower-risk option at 5.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CEFA or URA?

Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 20.40% return vs 6.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFA or URA?

CEFA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

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

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 2.67% for CEFA.

What is the main difference between CEFA and URA?

CEFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while URA is Uranium. CEFA tracks S&P Developed ex-U.S. Catholic Values Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CEFA and 0.69% for URA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.29 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.