CIBR vs. NUKZ

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

CIBR (First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF) and NUKZ (Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CIBR is a Cybersecurity fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, while NUKZ is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CIBR returned 17.89% vs 31.62% for NUKZ. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CIBR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for NUKZ.

Performance

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIBR achieves a 20.76% return, which is significantly higher than NUKZ's 7.72% return.

CIBR

• 1D: -0.66%
• 1M: 14.35%
• YTD: 20.76%
• 6M: 15.03%
• 1Y: 17.89%
• 3Y*: 26.06%
• 5Y*: 14.39%
• 10Y*: 17.92%

NUKZ

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -6.54%
• YTD: 7.72%
• 6M: 3.81%
• 1Y: 31.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	20.76%	13.06%	12.99%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	7.72%	56.57%	62.98%

Correlation

The correlation between CIBR and NUKZ 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.49

The correlation between CIBR and NUKZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CIBR	NUKZ
Technology	94.0%	1.4%
Industrials	3.5%	45.9%
Communication Services	2.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	4.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	12.9%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	35.8%

Return for Risk

CIBR vs. NUKZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CIBR

CIBR Risk / Return Rank: 21
CIBR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
CIBR Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
CIBR Omega Ratio Rank: 23
CIBR Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
CIBR Martin Ratio Rank: 19

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 34
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 30
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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.

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). 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.

	CIBR	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.72	1.05	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.14	1.59	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.19	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.82	1.92	-1.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.93	4.79	-2.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIBR Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the NUKZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIBR and NUKZ, 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

	CIBR	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72	1.05	-0.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.64	1.63	-1.00

Drawdowns

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIBR drawdown since its inception was -33.89%, roughly equal to the maximum NUKZ drawdown of -33.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIBR and NUKZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CIBR	NUKZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.89%	-33.03%	-0.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.99%	-16.51%	-5.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.99%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.89%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.68%	-10.27%	+1.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.66%	-6.02%	-2.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.29%	6.62%	+2.67%

Volatility

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Volatility Comparison

First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a higher volatility of 12.00% compared to Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) at 10.20%. This indicates that CIBR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NUKZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CIBR	NUKZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.00%	10.20%	+1.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.42%	22.61%	-1.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.97%	30.26%	-5.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.02%	32.82%	-7.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.64%	32.82%	-9.18%

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIBR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than NUKZ's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CIBR vs. NUKZ - Dividend Comparison

CIBR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.47%, less than NUKZ's 0.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	0.47%	0.42%	0.29%	0.42%	0.31%	0.59%	1.10%	0.23%	0.23%	0.10%	0.77%	0.58%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.85%	0.91%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CIBR and NUKZ in my portfolio?

CIBR and NUKZ 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, CIBR or NUKZ?

CIBR has higher volatility (12.00%) compared to NUKZ (10.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CIBR dropped -33.89% vs NUKZ's -33.03%.

Which ETF is better, CIBR or NUKZ?

On 1-year performance, NUKZ leads with 31.62% vs 17.89% for CIBR. On fees, CIBR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, NUKZ has been the lower-risk option at 10.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CIBR or NUKZ?

Over the 1-year period, NUKZ has performed better with a 31.62% return vs 17.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CIBR or NUKZ?

CIBR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CIBR or NUKZ?

NUKZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.47% for CIBR.

What is the main difference between CIBR and NUKZ?

CIBR is categorized as Cybersecurity, while NUKZ is Energy Equities. CIBR tracks Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index, while NUKZ tracks Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CIBR and 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NUKZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.05 vs 0.72), 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.