PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CWW.TO vs. URA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CWW.TO vs. URA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWW.TO (iShares Global Water Index ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CWW.TO is a Water Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while URA is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWW.TO returned 8.42%/yr vs 17.97%/yr for URA. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CWW.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.

Performance

CWW.TO vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CWW.TO is traded in CAD, while URA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the URA values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWW.TO achieves a 0.67% return, which is significantly lower than URA's 19.43% return. Over the past 10 years, CWW.TO has underperformed URA with an annualized return of 8.42%, while URA has yielded a comparatively higher 17.97% annualized return.

CWW.TO

1D
0.76%
1M
-0.37%
YTD
0.67%
6M
-4.32%
1Y
3.23%
3Y*
6.26%
5Y*
4.32%
10Y*
8.42%

URA

1D
-5.28%
1M
-6.16%
YTD
19.43%
6M
12.81%
1Y
63.34%
3Y*
40.88%
5Y*
24.86%
10Y*
17.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWW.TO vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		0.67%10.11%2.99%11.71%-16.52%27.08%12.93%26.85%-2.69%17.91%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF		19.43%59.51%7.96%43.02%-5.00%56.15%38.94%-8.28%-15.50%11.76%

Correlation

The correlation between CWW.TO and URA 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

0.18

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2010

0.29

The correlation between CWW.TO and URA shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (1 year) to 0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CWW.TO vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CWW.TO
URA

Utilities

46.7%
9.4%

Industrials

44.2%
21.9%

Basic Materials

5.8%
5.0%

Energy

1.6%
57.0%

Technology

1.1%
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

0.5%

-

Real Estate

0.2%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Utilities

CWW.TO
46.7%
URA
9.4%

Industrials

CWW.TO
44.2%
URA
21.9%

Basic Materials

CWW.TO
5.8%
URA
5.0%

Energy

CWW.TO
1.6%
URA
57.0%

Technology

CWW.TO
1.1%
URA
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

CWW.TO
0.5%
URA

-

Real Estate

CWW.TO
0.2%
URA

-

Communication Services

CWW.TO

-

URA

-

Consumer Defensive

CWW.TO

-

URA

-

Financial Services

CWW.TO

-

URA

-

Healthcare

CWW.TO

-

URA

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Global Water Index ETF

Global X Uranium ETF

Often compared with CWW.TO:
CWW.TO vs. FIWCWW.TO vs. COW.TOCWW.TO vs. CIF.TOCWW.TO vs. KBWBCWW.TO vs. VFV.TOCWW.TO vs. XAW.TOCWW.TO vs. ENFR
Often compared with URA:
URA vs. NLRURA vs. URNMURA vs. NUKZURA vs. CCJURA vs. UUUUURA vs. URANURA vs. U-U.TO

Return for Risk

CWW.TO vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CWW.TO
CWW.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWW.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
URA
URA Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
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.

CWW.TO vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) 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.

CWW.TOURADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.23
1.30

-1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.44
1.94

-1.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.22

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.32

2.26

-1.95

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.79

4.82

-4.04

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWW.TO vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWW.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is lower than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 1.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWW.TO 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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CWW.TOURADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

1.30

-1.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.61

-0.32

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.51

0.51

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.01

+0.37

Drawdowns

CWW.TO vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWW.TO drawdown since its inception was -46.54%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -90.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWW.TO and URA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CWW.TOURADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.54%

-90.50%

+43.96%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.24%

-28.13%

+17.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.77%

-35.85%

+16.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.05%

-35.85%

+4.80%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.05%

-57.17%

+26.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.12%

-19.56%

+11.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.47%

-69.55%

+60.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

13.17%

-9.06%

Volatility

CWW.TO vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Water Index ETF (CWW.TO) is 4.23%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 15.88%. This indicates that CWW.TO 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CWW.TOURADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.23%

15.88%

-11.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.85%

37.43%

-26.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.83%

49.12%

-35.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.40%

41.21%

-25.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.52%

35.40%

-18.88%

CWW.TO vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWW.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWW.TO vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

CWW.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.56%, less than URA's 4.14% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CWW.TO
iShares Global Water Index ETF		1.56%1.34%1.05%1.17%1.28%2.62%1.11%1.24%2.95%1.41%1.60%1.16%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF		4.14%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

CWW.TO and URA 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.

On fees, CWW.TO is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CWW.TO is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

CWW.TO is categorized as Water Equities, while URA is Commodity Producers Equities. CWW.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for CWW.TO and 0.69% for URA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CWW.TO and URA

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