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 2.18% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -15.72% return.


CLOB

1D
-0.11%
1M
0.25%
6M
1.80%
YTD
2.18%
1Y
5.72%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

NLR

1D
-4.31%
1M
-16.00%
6M
-27.85%
YTD
-15.72%
1Y
-6.24%
3Y*
23.28%
5Y*
17.50%
10Y*
10.63%
*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
2.18%6.94%2.77%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
-15.72%56.50%-2.56%

Correlation

The correlation between CLOB and NLR is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2024

0.12

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: 8181
Overall Rank
CLOB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLOB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLOB Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
CLOB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLOB Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 99
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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.

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.


CLOBNLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.01

+0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.94

-0.17

+3.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.66

-0.39

+13.05

CLOB vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOB Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of -0.15. 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...

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%

-36.32%

+34.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-36.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.32%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.14%

-36.32%

+36.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.29%

-35.67%

+35.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.45%

15.87%

-15.42%

Volatility

CLOB vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF (CLOB) is 0.39%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 9.39%. 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

0.39%

9.39%

-9.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.42%

32.73%

-30.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85%

43.21%

-40.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.36%

29.90%

-24.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.36%

24.42%

-19.06%

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 6.33%, more than NLR's 3.02% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CLOB
VanEck AA-BB CLO ETF
6.33%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
3.02%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 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NLR has higher volatility (9.39%) compared to CLOB (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOB dropped -5.54% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 1-year performance, CLOB leads with 5.72% vs -6.24% for NLR. On fees, CLOB is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CLOB has been the lower-risk option at 0.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CLOB has performed better with a 5.72% return vs -6.24%. 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 6.33%, compared with 3.02% for NLR.

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

CLOB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs -0.15), 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