EMBX vs. NLR
EMBX (VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMBX is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund actively managed by VanEck, while NLR is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. EMBX is actively managed, while NLR is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMBX returned 5.10%/yr vs 13.66%/yr for NLR. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMBX charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
EMBX vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMBX achieves a 3.49% return, which is significantly lower than NLR's 6.14% return. Over the past 10 years, EMBX has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 5.10%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 13.66% annualized return.
EMBX
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- 0.90%
- YTD
- 3.49%
- 6M
- 3.62%
- 1Y
- 15.18%
- 3Y*
- 10.16%
- 5Y*
- 3.88%
- 10Y*
- 5.10%
NLR
- 1D
- -4.59%
- 1M
- -8.11%
- YTD
- 6.14%
- 6M
- 1.51%
- 1Y
- 36.84%
- 3Y*
- 35.11%
- 5Y*
- 21.94%
- 10Y*
- 13.66%
EMBX vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMBX VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 3.49% | 18.80% | 3.09% | 9.34% | -7.21% | -4.30% | 11.57% | 13.10% | -6.21% | 11.97% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 6.14% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMBX and NLR is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2012 | 0.28 |
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
EMBX vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
EMBX
NLR
EMBX vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). 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.
| EMBX | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.79 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.17 | +0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.96 | 1.43 | +1.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.58 | 2.93 | +9.65 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMBX | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.66 | 0.88 | +1.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 | 0.75 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.77 | 0.57 | +0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 0.18 | +0.35 |
Drawdowns
EMBX vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMBX drawdown since its inception was -25.11%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBX and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMBX | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.11% | -65.05% | +39.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.14% | -25.80% | +20.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.41% | -30.48% | +23.07% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.07% | -30.48% | +6.41% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.11% | -34.35% | +9.24% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.62% | -19.80% | +19.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.08% | -35.72% | +28.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.21% | 12.61% | -11.40% |
Volatility
EMBX vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) is 1.73%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that EMBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMBX | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.73% | 13.18% | -11.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.77% | 32.83% | -28.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.72% | 42.32% | -36.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.10% | 29.24% | -23.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.65% | 24.02% | -17.37% |
EMBX vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMBX has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMBX vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
EMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.91%, more than NLR's 2.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMBX VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.91% | 6.95% | 8.20% | 5.49% | 8.21% | 5.50% | 6.56% | 7.89% | 7.25% | 7.66% | 3.94% | 6.84% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 2.40% | 2.55% | 0.76% | 4.54% | 2.02% | 1.99% | 2.23% | 2.21% | 3.91% | 4.86% | 3.62% | 3.30% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMBX and NLR have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (13.18%) compared to EMBX (1.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBX dropped -25.11% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 13.66% vs 5.10% for EMBX. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, EMBX has been the lower-risk option at 1.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 13.66% return vs 5.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for EMBX.
EMBX has the higher dividend yield at 5.91%, compared with 2.40% for NLR.
EMBX is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for EMBX and 0.56% for NLR.
EMBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 0.88), 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 EMBX and NLR
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