EMET vs. NLR

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EMET (VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMET is a Copper fund tracking the MVIS Global Clean-Tech Metals Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMET returned 12.01%/yr vs 23.28%/yr for NLR. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMET charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

EMET vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF (EMET) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMET achieves a 0.97% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -15.72% return.

EMET

• 1D: -3.27%
• 1M: -18.40%
• 6M: -12.86%
• YTD: 0.97%
• 1Y: 55.39%
• 3Y*: 12.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NLR

• 1D: -4.31%
• 1M: -16.00%
• 6M: -27.85%
• YTD: -15.72%
• 1Y: -6.24%
• 3Y*: 23.28%
• 5Y*: 17.50%
• 10Y*: 10.63%

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

EMET vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMET VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF	0.97%	81.22%	-12.81%	-12.28%	-17.15%	0.11%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	-15.72%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.29%	-1.02%

Correlation

The correlation between EMET and NLR is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2021	0.55

The correlation between EMET and NLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMET vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMET

EMET Risk / Return Rank: 48
EMET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
EMET Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
EMET Omega Ratio Rank: 47
EMET Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EMET Martin Ratio Rank: 46

NLR

NLR Risk / Return Rank: 8
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 9
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 7

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.

EMET vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF (EMET) 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.

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.

	EMET	NLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	-0.15	+1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	0.09	+1.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.01	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.18	-0.17	+2.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.93	-0.39	+6.32

EMET vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMET Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of -0.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMET and NLR, 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

EMET vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMET drawdown since its inception was -53.05%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMET and NLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMET	NLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.05%	-65.05%	+12.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.58%	-36.32%	+10.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-40.50%	-36.32%	-4.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.32%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.47%	-36.32%	+12.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.59%	-35.67%	+11.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.37%	15.87%	-6.50%

Volatility

EMET vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF (EMET) has a higher volatility of 11.36% compared to VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) at 9.39%. This indicates that EMET's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMET	NLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.36%	9.39%	+1.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.81%	32.73%	+1.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.91%	43.21%	-4.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.47%	29.90%	+3.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.47%	24.42%	+9.05%

EMET vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMET has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMET vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

EMET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than NLR's 3.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMET VanEck Copper and Green Metals ETF	1.83%	1.84%	1.89%	2.02%	2.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	3.02%	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

Can I hold both EMET and NLR in my portfolio?

EMET and NLR have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMET or NLR?

EMET has higher volatility (11.36%) compared to NLR (9.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMET dropped -53.05% vs NLR's -65.05%.

Which ETF is better, EMET or NLR?

On 3-year performance, NLR leads with 23.28% vs 12.01% for EMET. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, NLR has been the lower-risk option at 9.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMET or NLR?

Over the 3-year period, NLR has performed better with a 23.28% return vs 12.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMET or NLR?

NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMET or NLR?

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 3.02%, compared with 1.83% for EMET.

What is the main difference between EMET and NLR?

EMET is categorized as Copper, while NLR is Uranium. EMET tracks MVIS Global Clean-Tech Metals Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for EMET and 0.56% for NLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs -0.15), 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.