EDOC vs. URA
EDOC (Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EDOC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the Solactive Telemedicine & Digital Health Index- TR Net, 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, EDOC returned -12.95%/yr vs 20.93%/yr for URA. Their 0.40 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EDOC charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.
Performance
EDOC vs. URA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDOC achieves a -5.19% return, which is significantly lower than URA's -4.49% return.
EDOC
- 1D
- 2.94%
- 1M
- -4.37%
- 6M
- -2.05%
- YTD
- -5.19%
- 1Y
- -10.31%
- 3Y*
- -6.93%
- 5Y*
- -12.95%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -9.16%
URA
- 1D
- 4.45%
- 1M
- -5.60%
- 6M
- -23.39%
- YTD
- -4.49%
- 1Y
- 11.87%
- 3Y*
- 27.86%
- 5Y*
- 20.93%
- 10Y*
- 15.21%
- ALL TIME*
- -3.09%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $260.96K | $227.88K | $213.27K | |
| $125.37M | $115.54M | $169.15M |
EDOC vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDOC Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF | -5.19% | -0.62% | -2.87% | -12.61% | -29.99% | -14.21% | 16.89% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | -4.49% | 67.18% | -0.58% | 46.25% | -11.32% | 57.57% | 31.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDOC and URA is 0.29, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2020 | 0.40 |
The correlation between EDOC and URA shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (1 year) to 0.42 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
EDOC vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank
EDOC
URA
EDOC vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF (EDOC) 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.
| EDOC | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.08 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.34 | 0.30 | -0.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.61 | 0.65 | -1.26 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EDOC vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDOC drawdown since its inception was -65.76%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDOC and URA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDOC | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.76% | -93.54% | +27.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.71% | -39.30% | +8.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -34.56% | -39.30% | +4.74% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -59.14% | -39.30% | -19.84% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -61.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -59.07% | -53.69% | -5.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.49% | -74.74% | +31.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.90% | 18.23% | -1.33% |
Volatility
EDOC vs. URA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF (EDOC) is 6.91%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 14.37%. This indicates that EDOC 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
| EDOC | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.91% | 14.37% | -7.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.44% | 37.93% | -20.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.91% | 52.40% | -29.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.67% | 44.16% | -17.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.27% | 38.14% | -11.87% |
EDOC vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDOC has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDOC vs. URA - Dividend Comparison
EDOC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.26%, less than URA's 5.11% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDOC Global X Telemedicine & Digital Health ETF | 0.26% | 0.33% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 5.11% | 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
EDOC and URA have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
URA has higher volatility (14.37%) compared to EDOC (6.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDOC dropped -65.76% vs URA's -93.54%.
On 5-year performance, URA leads with 20.93% vs -12.95% for EDOC. On fees, EDOC is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, EDOC has been the lower-risk option at 6.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 20.93% return vs -12.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EDOC is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.
URA has the higher dividend yield at 5.11%, compared with 0.26% for EDOC.
EDOC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while URA is Uranium. EDOC tracks Solactive Telemedicine & Digital Health Index- TR Net, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for EDOC and 0.69% for URA.
URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.23 vs -0.45), 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.
Find the right allocation for EDOC 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