CEFS vs. URNM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) and URNM (NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts, while URNM is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the North Shore Global Uranium Mining Index. CEFS is actively managed, while URNM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CEFS returned 13.85%/yr vs 15.58%/yr for URNM. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEFS charges 1.29%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for URNM.

Performance

CEFS vs. URNM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF (URNM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEFS achieves a 13.75% return, which is significantly higher than URNM's 11.97% return.

CEFS

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 4.35%
• YTD: 13.75%
• 6M: 15.64%
• 1Y: 25.00%
• 3Y*: 22.04%
• 5Y*: 13.85%
• 10Y*: —

URNM

• 1D: -5.94%
• 1M: -7.38%
• YTD: 11.97%
• 6M: 10.07%
• 1Y: 52.67%
• 3Y*: 27.00%
• 5Y*: 15.58%
• 10Y*: —

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

CEFS vs. URNM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	13.75%	16.67%	23.48%	20.99%	-7.08%	17.86%	3.40%	3.89%
URNM NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF	11.97%	40.78%	-14.13%	57.80%	-11.86%	78.32%	68.36%	3.70%

Correlation

The correlation between CEFS and URNM is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2019	0.39

CEFS vs. URNM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CEFS	URNM
Financial Services	48.9%	-
Technology	12.4%	-
Energy	11.2%	97.4%
Industrials	6.7%	-
Healthcare	4.6%	-
Utilities	4.2%	-
Communication Services	4.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.6%	2.6%
Real Estate	1.2%	-

Return for Risk

CEFS vs. URNM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 80
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 83

URNM

URNM Risk / Return Rank: 29
URNM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
URNM Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
URNM Omega Ratio Rank: 28
URNM Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
URNM Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

CEFS vs. URNM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) and NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF (URNM). 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.

	CEFS	URNM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	1.03	+1.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	1.66	+2.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.19	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.43	1.65	+2.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.26	3.59	+13.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CEFS vs. URNM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEFS Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is higher than the URNM Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEFS and URNM, 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

	CEFS	URNM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.53	1.03	+1.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.06	0.32	+0.74
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	0.67	+0.12

Drawdowns

CEFS vs. URNM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEFS drawdown since its inception was -38.99%, smaller than the maximum URNM drawdown of -50.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFS and URNM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEFS	URNM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.99%	-50.78%	+11.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.67%	-32.04%	+26.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.37%	-50.78%	+37.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.85%	-50.78%	+33.93%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.51%	-26.82%	+26.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.67%	-18.03%	+14.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.45%	14.71%	-13.26%

Volatility

CEFS vs. URNM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) is 3.37%, while NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF (URNM) has a volatility of 16.19%. This indicates that CEFS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URNM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CEFS	URNM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.37%	16.19%	-12.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.56%	40.32%	-31.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.95%	51.69%	-41.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.08%	48.30%	-35.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.33%	46.90%	-31.57%

CEFS vs. URNM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEFS has a 1.29% expense ratio, which is higher than URNM's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEFS vs. URNM - Dividend Comparison

CEFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.10%, more than URNM's 2.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	7.10%	7.84%	8.79%	9.20%	11.32%	10.73%	8.61%	8.10%	10.43%	5.02%
URNM NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF	2.84%	3.18%	3.18%	3.63%	0.00%	6.70%	2.57%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEFS and URNM in my portfolio?

CEFS and URNM have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CEFS or URNM?

URNM has higher volatility (16.19%) compared to CEFS (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFS dropped -38.99% vs URNM's -50.78%.

Which ETF is better, CEFS or URNM?

On 5-year performance, URNM leads with 15.58% vs 13.85% for CEFS. On fees, URNM is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, CEFS has been the lower-risk option at 3.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CEFS or URNM?

Over the 5-year period, URNM has performed better with a 15.58% return vs 13.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEFS or URNM?

URNM is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for CEFS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CEFS or URNM?

CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.10%, compared with 2.84% for URNM.

What is the main difference between CEFS and URNM?

CEFS is categorized as Event Driven, while URNM is Commodity Producers Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.29% for CEFS and 0.85% for URNM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.03), 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.