CLOI vs. NLR
CLOI (VanEck CLO ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLOI is a CLO fund actively managed by VanEck, while NLR is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. CLOI is actively managed, while NLR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CLOI returned 7.11%/yr vs 35.11%/yr for NLR. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLOI charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
CLOI vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLOI achieves a 2.06% return, which is significantly lower than NLR's 6.14% return.
CLOI
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.61%
- YTD
- 2.06%
- 6M
- 2.58%
- 1Y
- 5.56%
- 3Y*
- 7.11%
- 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%
CLOI vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLOI VanEck CLO ETF | 2.06% | 5.84% | 8.26% | 8.95% | 2.59% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 6.14% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 9.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLOI and NLR is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2022 | 0.04 |
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
CLOI vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
CLOI
NLR
CLOI vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck CLO ETF (CLOI) 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.
| CLOI | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +6.00 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.16 | 1.17 | +0.99 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 8.95 | 1.43 | +7.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 42.16 | 2.93 | +39.23 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CLOI | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.72 | 0.88 | +3.84 |
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 | 2.77 | 0.18 | +2.59 |
Drawdowns
CLOI vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLOI drawdown since its inception was -3.25%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLOI and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLOI | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.25% | -65.05% | +61.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.62% | -25.80% | +25.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.25% | -30.48% | +27.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.48% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -19.80% | +19.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.19% | -35.72% | +35.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.13% | 12.61% | -12.48% |
Volatility
CLOI vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck CLO ETF (CLOI) is 0.14%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that CLOI 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
| CLOI | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.14% | 13.18% | -13.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.67% | 32.83% | -32.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.19% | 42.32% | -41.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.56% | 29.24% | -26.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.56% | 24.02% | -21.46% |
CLOI vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLOI has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLOI vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
CLOI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.35%, more than NLR's 2.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLOI VanEck CLO ETF | 5.35% | 5.61% | 6.71% | 5.61% | 2.23% | 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
CLOI and NLR have a correlation of 0.13, 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 CLOI (0.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOI dropped -3.25% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 3-year performance, NLR leads with 35.11% vs 7.11% for CLOI. On fees, CLOI is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CLOI has been the lower-risk option at 0.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, NLR has performed better with a 35.11% return vs 7.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CLOI is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.
CLOI has the higher dividend yield at 5.35%, compared with 2.40% for NLR.
CLOI is categorized as CLO, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CLOI and 0.56% for NLR.
CLOI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.72 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.
Find the right allocation for CLOI 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