PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CLOB vs. NLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CLOB vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF (CLOB) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLOB achieves a 1.88% return, which is significantly lower than NLR's 6.14% return.


CLOB

1D
0.01%
1M
0.47%
YTD
1.88%
6M
2.35%
1Y
6.36%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

NLR

1D
-4.59%
1M
-8.11%
YTD
6.14%
6M
1.51%
1Y
36.84%
3Y*
35.11%
5Y*
21.94%
10Y*
13.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CLOB vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CLOB
VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF
1.88%6.94%2.81%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
6.14%56.50%-2.95%

Correlation

The correlation between CLOB and NLR is 0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2024

0.10

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

CLOB vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLOB
CLOB Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
CLOB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLOB Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLOB Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
CLOB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLOB Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CLOB vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF (CLOB) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). 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.


CLOBNLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.17

+0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.27

1.43

+1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.04

2.93

+11.11

CLOB vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOB Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLOB and NLR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CLOBNLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15

0.88

+1.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.27

0.18

+1.09

Drawdowns

CLOB vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLOB drawdown since its inception was -5.54%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLOB and NLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CLOBNLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.54%

-65.05%

+59.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.96%

-25.80%

+23.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-19.80%

+19.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.30%

-35.72%

+35.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.45%

12.61%

-12.16%

Volatility

CLOB vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF (CLOB) is 0.97%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that CLOB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CLOBNLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.97%

13.18%

-12.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.46%

32.83%

-30.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.98%

42.32%

-39.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.53%

29.24%

-23.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.53%

24.02%

-18.49%

CLOB vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLOB has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.


Dividends

CLOB vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

CLOB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.42%, more than NLR's 2.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CLOB
VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF
6.42%6.61%1.65%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
2.40%2.55%0.76%4.54%2.02%1.99%2.23%2.21%3.91%4.86%3.62%3.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


CLOB and NLR have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NLR has higher volatility (13.18%) compared to CLOB (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOB dropped -5.54% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 1-year performance, NLR leads with 36.84% vs 6.36% for CLOB. On fees, CLOB is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CLOB has been the lower-risk option at 0.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, NLR has performed better with a 36.84% return vs 6.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CLOB is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

CLOB has the higher dividend yield at 6.42%, compared with 2.40% for NLR.

CLOB is categorized as CLO, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CLOB and 0.56% for NLR.

CLOB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 0.88), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CLOB and NLR

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