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

Performance

EMC vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) 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, EMC achieves a 25.25% return, which is significantly higher than URA's 17.93% return.


EMC

1D
-1.64%
1M
9.84%
YTD
25.25%
6M
27.29%
1Y
39.53%
3Y*
17.56%
5Y*
10Y*

URA

1D
-5.67%
1M
-8.00%
YTD
17.93%
6M
13.25%
1Y
61.26%
3Y*
39.27%
5Y*
21.39%
10Y*
17.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMC vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EMC
Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF
25.25%18.91%3.75%1.90%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
17.93%67.18%-0.58%44.38%

Correlation

The correlation between EMC and URA is 0.53, 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

0.53

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

0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2023

0.51

The correlation between EMC and URA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMC vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMC
URA

Technology

42.4%
0.9%

Financial Services

22.7%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.3%

-

Communication Services

8.1%

-

Industrials

4.5%
21.9%

Basic Materials

3.5%
5.0%

Energy

3.0%
57.0%

Healthcare

2.2%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.1%

-

Real Estate

1.4%

-

Utilities

-

9.4%

Technology

EMC
42.4%
URA
0.9%

Financial Services

EMC
22.7%
URA

-

Consumer Cyclical

EMC
10.3%
URA

-

Communication Services

EMC
8.1%
URA

-

Industrials

EMC
4.5%
URA
21.9%

Basic Materials

EMC
3.5%
URA
5.0%

Energy

EMC
3.0%
URA
57.0%

Healthcare

EMC
2.2%
URA

-

Consumer Defensive

EMC
2.1%
URA

-

Real Estate

EMC
1.4%
URA

-

Utilities

EMC

-

URA
9.4%

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

EMC vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMC
EMC Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
EMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMC Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
EMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMC Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

EMC vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) 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.


EMCURADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.22

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.86

2.17

+0.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.54

4.58

+5.95

EMC vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is higher than the URA Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMC 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


EMCURADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

1.23

+0.69

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.87

-0.05

+0.92

Drawdowns

EMC vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMC drawdown since its inception was -18.38%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMC and URA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMCURADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.38%

-93.54%

+75.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.89%

-28.43%

+14.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.38%

-37.81%

+19.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.64%

-42.81%

+41.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.11%

-75.01%

+70.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.76%

13.40%

-9.64%

Volatility

EMC vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) is 9.03%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 15.94%. This indicates that EMC 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


EMCURADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.03%

15.94%

-6.91%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.24%

38.29%

-20.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.68%

50.19%

-29.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.55%

43.62%

-25.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.55%

37.73%

-19.18%

EMC vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMC vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

EMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, less than URA's 4.14% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMC
Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF
0.63%0.78%1.13%0.89%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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


EMC and URA have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URA has higher volatility (15.94%) compared to EMC (9.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMC dropped -18.38% vs URA's -93.54%.

On 3-year performance, URA leads with 39.27% vs 17.56% for EMC. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, EMC has been the lower-risk option at 9.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, URA has performed better with a 39.27% return vs 17.56%. 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 0.75% for EMC.

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.14%, compared with 0.63% for EMC.

EMC is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while URA is Commodity Producers Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMC and 0.69% for URA.

EMC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.23), 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 EMC 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