CLOU vs. URA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CLOU (Global X Cloud Computing ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLOU is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Indxx Global Cloud Computing Index, while URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CLOU returned -5.18%/yr vs 20.40%/yr for URA. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLOU charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.

Performance

CLOU vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Cloud Computing ETF (CLOU) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLOU achieves a -4.95% return, which is significantly lower than URA's 6.67% return.

CLOU

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: -5.99%
• YTD: -4.95%
• 6M: -5.99%
• 1Y: -5.37%
• 3Y*: 3.57%
• 5Y*: -5.18%
• 10Y*: —

URA

• 1D: -2.61%
• 1M: -6.90%
• YTD: 6.67%
• 6M: 2.57%
• 1Y: 27.21%
• 3Y*: 34.68%
• 5Y*: 20.40%
• 10Y*: 16.42%

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

CLOU vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CLOU Global X Cloud Computing ETF	-4.95%	-5.59%	5.74%	41.36%	-39.56%	-3.27%	77.18%	4.06%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	6.67%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	57.57%	41.33%	-10.31%

Correlation

The correlation between CLOU and URA is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.35
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2019	0.40

The correlation between CLOU and URA shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (1 year) to 0.42 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CLOU vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CLOU	URA
Technology	90.7%	0.9%
Communication Services	4.0%	-
Real Estate	3.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	2.0%	-
Healthcare	0.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	4.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	64.2%
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	22.7%
Utilities	-	7.4%

Return for Risk

CLOU vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLOU

CLOU Risk / Return Rank: 7
CLOU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
CLOU Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
CLOU Omega Ratio Rank: 7
CLOU Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
CLOU Martin Ratio Rank: 7

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 19
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 19
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

CLOU vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Cloud Computing ETF (CLOU) 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.

	CLOU	URA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.18	0.53	-0.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.05	1.09	-1.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.13	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.20	0.87	-1.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.47	1.87	-2.34

CLOU vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOU Sharpe Ratio is -0.18, which is lower than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLOU and URA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CLOU vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLOU drawdown since its inception was -53.74%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLOU and URA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLOU	URA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.74%	-93.54%	+39.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.24%	-31.48%	+4.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.18%	-37.81%	+4.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-53.74%	-37.90%	-15.84%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-61.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-31.93%	-48.27%	+16.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.43%	-74.90%	+50.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.46%	14.58%	-3.12%

Volatility

CLOU vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Cloud Computing ETF (CLOU) is 13.72%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 17.86%. This indicates that CLOU 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.

Volatility by Period

	CLOU	URA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.72%	17.86%	-4.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.33%	39.53%	-14.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.89%	51.33%	-21.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.65%	43.92%	-13.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.76%	37.95%	-7.19%

CLOU vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLOU has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLOU vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

CLOU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.57%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLOU Global X Cloud Computing ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.76%	0.00%	0.05%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.57%	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

Can I hold both CLOU and URA in my portfolio?

CLOU and URA have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CLOU or URA?

URA has higher volatility (17.86%) compared to CLOU (13.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOU dropped -53.74% vs URA's -93.54%.

Which ETF is better, CLOU or URA?

On 5-year performance, URA leads with 20.40% vs -5.18% for CLOU. On fees, CLOU is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, CLOU has been the lower-risk option at 13.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CLOU or URA?

Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 20.40% return vs -5.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLOU or URA?

CLOU is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CLOU or URA?

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 0.00% for CLOU.

What is the main difference between CLOU and URA?

CLOU is categorized as Technology Equities, while URA is Uranium. CLOU tracks Indxx Global Cloud Computing Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for CLOU and 0.69% for URA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.53 vs -0.18), 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.