CSNR vs. URNM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSNR (Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF) and URNM (NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds. CSNR is actively managed, while URNM is passively managed. Over the past year, CSNR returned 47.34% vs 52.67% for URNM. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSNR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for URNM.

Performance

CSNR vs. URNM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSNR achieves a 21.88% return, which is significantly higher than URNM's 11.97% return.

CSNR

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

URNM

• 1D: -5.94%
• 1M: -7.38%
• YTD: 11.97%
• 6M: 10.07%
• 1Y: 52.67%
• 3Y*: 27.00%
• 5Y*: 15.58%
• 10Y*: —

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

CSNR vs. URNM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CSNR Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF	21.88%	26.55%
URNM NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF	11.97%	38.28%

Correlation

The correlation between CSNR and URNM is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	0.47

Return for Risk

CSNR vs. URNM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSNR

CSNR Risk / Return Rank: 86
CSNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CSNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CSNR Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CSNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CSNR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

URNM

URNM Risk / Return Rank: 29
URNM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
URNM Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
URNM Omega Ratio Rank: 28
URNM Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
URNM Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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. URNM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) and NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF (URNM). 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.

	CSNR	URNM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	1.03	+1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.59	1.66	+1.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.19	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.67	1.65	+4.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.27	3.59	+18.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSNR vs. URNM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is higher than the URNM Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSNR and URNM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CSNR	URNM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81	1.03	+1.78
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.32	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.97	0.67	+1.30

Drawdowns

CSNR vs. URNM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSNR drawdown since its inception was -15.33%, smaller than the maximum URNM drawdown of -50.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSNR and URNM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSNR	URNM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.33%	-50.78%	+35.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.39%	-32.04%	+23.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-50.78%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-50.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-26.82%	+25.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.82%	-18.03%	+16.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.13%	14.71%	-12.58%

Volatility

CSNR vs. URNM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) is 4.24%, while NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF (URNM) has a volatility of 16.19%. This indicates that CSNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URNM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSNR	URNM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.24%	16.19%	-11.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.65%	40.32%	-26.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.94%	51.69%	-34.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.77%	48.30%	-28.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.77%	46.90%	-27.13%

CSNR vs. URNM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSNR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than URNM's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSNR vs. URNM - Dividend Comparison

CSNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, less than URNM's 2.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CSNR Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF	1.98%	2.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
URNM NorthShore Global Uranium Mining ETF	2.84%	3.18%	3.18%	3.63%	0.00%	6.70%	2.57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSNR and URNM in my portfolio?

CSNR and URNM have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CSNR or URNM?

URNM has higher volatility (16.19%) compared to CSNR (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSNR dropped -15.33% vs URNM's -50.78%.

Which ETF is better, CSNR or URNM?

On 1-year performance, URNM leads with 52.67% vs 47.34% for CSNR. On fees, CSNR is cheaper at 0.50% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, CSNR or URNM?

Over the 1-year period, URNM has performed better with a 52.67% return vs 47.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSNR or URNM?

CSNR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for URNM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CSNR or URNM?

URNM has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 1.98% for CSNR.

What is the main difference between CSNR and URNM?

They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CSNR and 0.85% for URNM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 1.03), 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.