PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEM vs. URA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEM vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEM achieves a 20.18% return, which is significantly higher than URA's 7.47% return. Over the past 10 years, EEM has underperformed URA with an annualized return of 9.37%, while URA has yielded a comparatively higher 15.57% annualized return.


EEM

1D
1.80%
1M
-3.22%
YTD
20.18%
6M
22.10%
1Y
43.51%
3Y*
20.79%
5Y*
5.98%
10Y*
9.37%

URA

1D
1.35%
1M
-16.78%
YTD
7.47%
6M
0.63%
1Y
43.02%
3Y*
33.80%
5Y*
19.23%
10Y*
15.57%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEM vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
20.18%33.98%6.49%8.95%-20.56%-3.63%17.02%18.22%-15.31%37.26%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
7.47%67.18%-0.58%46.25%-11.32%57.57%41.33%-3.54%-22.11%19.36%

Correlation

The correlation between EEM and URA is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.55

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.51

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

0.54

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2010

0.56

The correlation between EEM and URA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEM vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EEM
URA

Technology

43.6%
0.9%

Financial Services

17.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

8.1%

-

Industrials

6.2%
20.9%

Basic Materials

6.1%
5.0%

Communication Services

5.7%

-

Energy

3.3%
58.2%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%

-

Healthcare

2.5%

-

Utilities

2.0%
9.2%

Real Estate

0.9%

-

Technology

EEM
43.6%
URA
0.9%

Financial Services

EEM
17.5%
URA

-

Consumer Cyclical

EEM
8.1%
URA

-

Industrials

EEM
6.2%
URA
20.9%

Basic Materials

EEM
6.1%
URA
5.0%

Communication Services

EEM
5.7%
URA

-

Energy

EEM
3.3%
URA
58.2%

Consumer Defensive

EEM
2.7%
URA

-

Healthcare

EEM
2.5%
URA

-

Utilities

EEM
2.0%
URA
9.2%

Real Estate

EEM
0.9%
URA

-

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

EEM vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEM
EEM Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

URA
URA Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
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.

EEM vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) 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.


EEMURADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.17

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.23

1.52

+1.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.20

3.16

+9.04

EEM vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is higher than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEM 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


EEMURADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.07

0.85

+1.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.44

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

0.41

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

-0.07

+0.43

Drawdowns

EEM vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEM drawdown since its inception was -66.43%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEM and URA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEMURADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.43%

-93.54%

+27.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.52%

-28.43%

+14.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.29%

-37.81%

+20.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.49%

-37.90%

+0.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.82%

-61.45%

+21.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.13%

-47.89%

+40.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.01%

-74.99%

+58.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.58%

13.66%

-10.08%

Volatility

EEM vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) is 10.60%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 16.85%. This indicates that EEM 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


EEMURADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.60%

16.85%

-6.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.87%

39.19%

-20.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.19%

51.23%

-30.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.16%

43.83%

-24.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.62%

37.84%

-17.22%

EEM vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEM has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEM vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

EEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, less than URA's 4.54% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
1.85%2.22%2.43%2.63%2.50%1.99%1.45%2.76%2.24%1.89%1.89%2.49%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
4.54%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


EEM and URA have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URA has higher volatility (16.85%) compared to EEM (10.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEM dropped -66.43% vs URA's -93.54%.

On 10-year performance, URA leads with 15.57% vs 9.37% for EEM. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, EEM has been the lower-risk option at 10.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, URA has performed better with a 15.57% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

URA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.54%, compared with 1.85% for EEM.

EEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while URA is Commodity Producers Equities. EEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net), 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: 0.72% for EEM and 0.69% for URA.

EEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 0.85), 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 EEM 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