EDOC vs. NUKZ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EDOC (Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF) and NUKZ (Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EDOC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the Solactive Telemedicine & Digital Health Index- TR Net, while NUKZ is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EDOC returned -19.29% vs 32.85% for NUKZ. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EDOC charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for NUKZ.

Performance

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF (EDOC) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EDOC achieves a -11.69% return, which is significantly lower than NUKZ's 11.95% return.

EDOC

• 1D: -1.35%
• 1M: 3.99%
• YTD: -11.69%
• 6M: -14.62%
• 1Y: -19.29%
• 3Y*: -8.58%
• 5Y*: -14.74%
• 10Y*: —

NUKZ

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 0.47%
• YTD: 11.95%
• 6M: 9.32%
• 1Y: 32.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EDOC Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF	-11.69%	-0.62%	2.08%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	11.95%	56.57%	60.11%

Correlation

The correlation between EDOC and NUKZ is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2024	0.48

Return for Risk

EDOC vs. NUKZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EDOC

EDOC Risk / Return Rank: 3
EDOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
EDOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
EDOC Omega Ratio Rank: 3
EDOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
EDOC Martin Ratio Rank: 3

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 33
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 29
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF (EDOC) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). 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.

	EDOC	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.87	1.08	-1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.17	1.62	-2.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.19	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.63	2.00	-2.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.21	4.79	-6.00

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EDOC Sharpe Ratio is -0.87, which is lower than the NUKZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EDOC and NUKZ, 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

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EDOC drawdown since its inception was -65.76%, which is greater than NUKZ's maximum drawdown of -33.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDOC and NUKZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	EDOC	NUKZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.76%	-33.03%	-32.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.71%	-16.51%	-14.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.78%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.36%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-61.88%	-6.74%	-55.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.19%	-6.07%	-37.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.92%	6.88%	+9.04%

Volatility

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF (EDOC) is 7.15%, while Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) has a volatility of 10.68%. This indicates that EDOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NUKZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EDOC	NUKZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.15%	10.68%	-3.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.56%	23.04%	-6.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.42%	30.54%	-8.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.46%	32.87%	-6.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.28%	32.87%	-6.59%

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EDOC has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than NUKZ's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

EDOC vs. NUKZ - Dividend Comparison

EDOC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than NUKZ's 0.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EDOC Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF	0.37%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.81%	0.91%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EDOC and NUKZ in my portfolio?

EDOC and NUKZ have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EDOC or NUKZ?

NUKZ has higher volatility (10.68%) compared to EDOC (7.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDOC dropped -65.76% vs NUKZ's -33.03%.

Which ETF is better, EDOC or NUKZ?

On 1-year performance, NUKZ leads with 32.85% vs -19.29% for EDOC. On fees, EDOC is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, EDOC has been the lower-risk option at 7.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EDOC or NUKZ?

Over the 1-year period, NUKZ has performed better with a 32.85% return vs -19.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EDOC or NUKZ?

EDOC is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EDOC or NUKZ?

NUKZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.81%, compared with 0.37% for EDOC.

What is the main difference between EDOC and NUKZ?

EDOC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while NUKZ is Energy Equities. EDOC tracks Solactive Telemedicine & Digital Health Index- TR Net, while NUKZ tracks Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for EDOC and 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NUKZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs -0.87), 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.