PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CSNR vs. URAN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CSNR vs. URAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) and Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF (URAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSNR achieves a 21.88% return, which is significantly higher than URAN's 5.17% return.


CSNR

1D
-0.56%
1M
1.40%
YTD
21.88%
6M
24.62%
1Y
47.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

URAN

1D
-3.96%
1M
-5.96%
YTD
5.17%
6M
2.21%
1Y
28.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CSNR vs. URAN - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CSNR and URAN is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025

0.48

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

CSNR vs. URAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSNR
CSNR Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
CSNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSNR Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
CSNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSNR Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

URAN
URAN Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
URAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
URAN Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
URAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
URAN Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
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.

CSNR vs. URAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) and Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF (URAN). 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.


CSNRURANDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.15

+0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.67

1.14

+4.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

22.27

2.27

+20.01

CSNR vs. URAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is higher than the URAN Sharpe Ratio of 0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSNR and URAN, 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


CSNRURANDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.81

0.73

+2.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.97

0.87

+1.11

Drawdowns

CSNR vs. URAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSNR drawdown since its inception was -15.33%, smaller than the maximum URAN drawdown of -31.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSNR and URAN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CSNRURANDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.33%

-31.96%

+16.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.39%

-25.31%

+16.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.42%

-20.16%

+18.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.82%

-10.75%

+8.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.13%

12.71%

-10.58%

Volatility

CSNR vs. URAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) is 4.24%, while Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF (URAN) has a volatility of 12.29%. This indicates that CSNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CSNRURANDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.24%

12.29%

-8.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.65%

29.33%

-15.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.94%

39.47%

-22.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.77%

39.13%

-19.36%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.77%

39.13%

-19.36%

CSNR vs. URAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSNR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than URAN's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

CSNR vs. URAN - Dividend Comparison

CSNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, less than URAN's 2.44% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
CSNR
Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF
1.98%2.39%0.00%
URAN
Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF
2.44%2.56%0.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


CSNR and URAN have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URAN has higher volatility (12.29%) compared to CSNR (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSNR dropped -15.33% vs URAN's -31.96%.

On 1-year performance, CSNR leads with 47.34% vs 28.74% for URAN. On fees, URAN is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CSNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CSNR has performed better with a 47.34% return vs 28.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

URAN is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CSNR.

URAN has the higher dividend yield at 2.44%, compared with 1.98% for CSNR.

They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CSNR and 0.35% for URAN.

CSNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 0.73), 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 CSNR and URAN

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