ERTH vs. NLR

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ERTH (Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ERTH is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI Global Environment Select Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ERTH returned 6.39%/yr vs 11.00%/yr for NLR. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ERTH charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

ERTH vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) 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, ERTH achieves a -1.58% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -13.99% return. Over the past 10 years, ERTH has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 6.39%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 11.00% annualized return.

ERTH

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -1.77%
• 6M: -3.27%
• YTD: -1.58%
• 1Y: 9.02%
• 3Y*: -2.78%
• 5Y*: -6.13%
• 10Y*: 6.39%
• ALL TIME*: 4.70%

NLR

• 1D: -1.41%
• 1M: -7.05%
• 6M: -28.16%
• YTD: -13.99%
• 1Y: -2.28%
• 3Y*: 23.67%
• 5Y*: 18.29%
• 10Y*: 11.00%
• ALL TIME*: 3.29%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	$113.13K	$114.74K	$158.59K
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	$43.05M	$48.38M	$60.74M

ERTH vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	-1.58%	18.47%	-13.56%	0.12%	-27.59%	2.64%	51.02%	36.78%	-12.49%	30.53%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	-13.99%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.29%	13.63%	3.49%	0.20%	4.94%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between ERTH and NLR is 0.61, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.51
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.54
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2007	0.59

The correlation between ERTH and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (10 years) to 0.61 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ERTH vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ERTH	NLR
Technology	12.1%	1.6%
Real Estate	11.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	-
Industrials	2.6%	12.6%
Utilities	2.3%	36.0%
Basic Materials	1.6%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	-
Energy	1.5%	49.8%
Financial Services	0.3%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

ERTH vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ERTH

ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 23
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 21
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
ERTH Martin Ratio Rank: 25

NLR

NLR Risk / Return Rank: 10
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 11
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 9

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ERTH vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) 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.

	ERTH	NLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.49	-0.10	+0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.79	0.16	+0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.02	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	-0.12	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.98	-0.26	+2.24

ERTH vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ERTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of -0.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ERTH 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

ERTH vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ERTH drawdown since its inception was -64.45%, roughly equal to the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERTH and NLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ERTH	NLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.45%	-65.05%	+0.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.51%	-37.52%	+26.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-31.18%	-37.52%	+6.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.72%	-37.52%	-14.20%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.72%	-37.52%	-14.20%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.70%	-35.01%	+1.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.55%	-35.67%	+14.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.25%	17.42%	-13.17%

Volatility

ERTH vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) is 4.87%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 12.90%. This indicates that ERTH 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.

Volatility by Period

	ERTH	NLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.87%	12.90%	-8.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.24%	32.42%	-19.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.43%	43.80%	-26.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.84%	30.13%	-7.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.53%	24.58%	-2.05%

ERTH vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ERTH has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

ERTH vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

ERTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, less than NLR's 2.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	1.97%	1.46%	1.00%	1.28%	1.22%	15.33%	0.21%	0.71%	0.61%	0.87%	1.06%	0.79%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	2.96%	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 ERTH and NLR in my portfolio?

ERTH and NLR have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ERTH or NLR?

NLR has higher volatility (12.90%) compared to ERTH (4.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERTH dropped -64.45% vs NLR's -65.05%.

Which ETF is better, ERTH or NLR?

On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 11.00% vs 6.39% for ERTH. On fees, ERTH is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 4.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ERTH or NLR?

Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 11.00% return vs 6.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ERTH or NLR?

ERTH is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

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

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 1.97% for ERTH.

What is the main difference between ERTH and NLR?

ERTH is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while NLR is Uranium. ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ERTH and 0.56% for NLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ERTH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.49 vs -0.10), 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.