CHIQ vs. URA
CHIQ (Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CHIQ is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index, while URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CHIQ returned 5.83%/yr vs 16.20%/yr for URA. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CHIQ charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.
Performance
CHIQ vs. URA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CHIQ achieves a -24.52% return, which is significantly lower than URA's 4.66% return. Over the past 10 years, CHIQ has underperformed URA with an annualized return of 5.83%, while URA has yielded a comparatively higher 16.20% annualized return.
CHIQ
- 1D
- -1.95%
- 1M
- -13.48%
- YTD
- -24.52%
- 6M
- -25.41%
- 1Y
- -24.60%
- 3Y*
- -1.32%
- 5Y*
- -13.15%
- 10Y*
- 5.83%
URA
- 1D
- -1.89%
- 1M
- -8.66%
- YTD
- 4.66%
- 6M
- 0.63%
- 1Y
- 21.17%
- 3Y*
- 33.83%
- 5Y*
- 19.79%
- 10Y*
- 16.20%
CHIQ vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | -24.52% | 13.69% | 10.74% | -10.70% | -22.01% | -27.07% | 92.61% | 44.19% | -28.65% | 67.74% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 4.66% | 67.18% | -0.58% | 46.25% | -11.32% | 57.57% | 41.33% | -3.54% | -22.11% | 19.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between CHIQ and URA 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 | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2010 | 0.42 |
CHIQ vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CHIQ
URA
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
CHIQ
URA
-
Consumer Defensive
CHIQ
URA
-
Real Estate
CHIQ
URA
-
Technology
CHIQ
URA
Industrials
CHIQ
URA
Basic Materials
CHIQ
-
URA
Communication Services
CHIQ
-
URA
-
Energy
CHIQ
-
URA
Financial Services
CHIQ
-
URA
-
Healthcare
CHIQ
-
URA
-
Utilities
CHIQ
-
URA
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CHIQ vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank
CHIQ
URA
CHIQ vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ) 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.
| CHIQ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.83 | 1.11 | -0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.72 | 0.68 | -1.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.78 | 1.44 | -3.22 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CHIQ vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CHIQ drawdown since its inception was -67.04%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHIQ and URA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CHIQ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.04% | -93.54% | +26.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -34.18% | -31.48% | -2.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.18% | -37.81% | +3.63% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.95% | -37.90% | -22.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.04% | -61.45% | -5.59% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -60.40% | -49.25% | -11.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -30.69% | -74.89% | +44.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.85% | 14.69% | -0.84% |
Volatility
CHIQ vs. URA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF (CHIQ) is 6.65%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 17.92%. This indicates that CHIQ 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CHIQ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.65% | 17.92% | -11.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.23% | 39.35% | -23.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.45% | 51.33% | -28.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 37.75% | 43.91% | -6.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.43% | 37.94% | -5.51% |
CHIQ vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CHIQ has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
CHIQ vs. URA - Dividend Comparison
CHIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, less than URA's 4.66% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CHIQ Global X MSCI China Consumer Discretionary ETF | 1.96% | 1.48% | 2.65% | 2.26% | 0.38% | 0.00% | 0.11% | 1.05% | 2.71% | 0.62% | 1.51% | 4.86% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 4.66% | 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
CHIQ and URA 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.
URA has higher volatility (17.92%) compared to CHIQ (6.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CHIQ dropped -67.04% vs URA's -93.54%.
On 10-year performance, URA leads with 16.20% vs 5.83% for CHIQ. On fees, CHIQ is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, CHIQ has been the lower-risk option at 6.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, URA has performed better with a 16.20% return vs 5.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CHIQ is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.
URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.66%, compared with 1.96% for CHIQ.
CHIQ is categorized as China Equities, while URA is Uranium. CHIQ tracks MSCI China Consumer Discretionary 10/50 Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CHIQ and 0.69% for URA.
URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.41 vs -1.11), 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.
Find the right allocation for CHIQ and URA
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer