PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GDMA vs. NLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GDMA vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and VanEck Vectors Uranium+Nuclear Energy ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDMA achieves a 11.18% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's 6.14% return.


GDMA

1D
0.30%
1M
1.83%
YTD
11.18%
6M
14.08%
1Y
32.26%
3Y*
16.91%
5Y*
7.66%
10Y*

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

GDMA vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
GDMA
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF
11.18%25.29%7.44%1.72%-2.08%3.95%21.08%11.59%-3.93%
NLR
VanEck Vectors Uranium+Nuclear Energy ETF
6.14%56.50%14.26%36.67%2.29%13.63%3.49%0.20%0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between GDMA and NLR is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.50

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

0.47

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

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018

0.38

The correlation between GDMA and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (5 years) to 0.50 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GDMA vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GDMA
NLR

Technology

23.4%
1.5%

Financial Services

14.5%

-

Industrials

14.4%
15.1%

Energy

10.0%
46.0%

Basic Materials

9.0%

-

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%

-

Communication Services

7.0%

-

Healthcare

5.5%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.5%

-

Utilities

2.4%
37.4%

Real Estate

1.6%

-

Technology

GDMA
23.4%
NLR
1.5%

Financial Services

GDMA
14.5%
NLR

-

Industrials

GDMA
14.4%
NLR
15.1%

Energy

GDMA
10.0%
NLR
46.0%

Basic Materials

GDMA
9.0%
NLR

-

Consumer Cyclical

GDMA
8.8%
NLR

-

Communication Services

GDMA
7.0%
NLR

-

Healthcare

GDMA
5.5%
NLR

-

Consumer Defensive

GDMA
3.5%
NLR

-

Utilities

GDMA
2.4%
NLR
37.4%

Real Estate

GDMA
1.6%
NLR

-

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

GDMA vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDMA
GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.

GDMA vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and VanEck Vectors Uranium+Nuclear Energy 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.


GDMANLRDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.47

0.88

+1.59

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.21

1.43

+1.77

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.17

+0.30

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.30

1.43

+2.87

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.92

2.93

+8.99

GDMA vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDMA 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GDMANLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.47

0.88

+1.59

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

0.75

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.89

0.18

+0.71

Drawdowns

GDMA vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and NLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GDMANLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.66%

-65.05%

+48.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.53%

-25.80%

+18.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.53%

-30.48%

+22.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.74%

-30.48%

+17.74%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.06%

-19.80%

+18.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.78%

-35.72%

+31.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.71%

12.61%

-9.90%

Volatility

GDMA vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) is 6.18%, while VanEck Vectors Uranium+Nuclear Energy ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that GDMA 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


GDMANLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.18%

13.18%

-7.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.03%

32.83%

-22.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.12%

42.32%

-29.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.67%

29.24%

-19.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.97%

24.02%

-13.05%

GDMA vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than NLR's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

GDMA vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, more than NLR's 2.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GDMA
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF
2.51%2.79%2.32%4.14%1.18%2.10%0.62%3.17%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NLR
VanEck Vectors Uranium+Nuclear Energy 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


GDMA and NLR have a correlation of 0.50, 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 GDMA (6.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 5-year performance, NLR leads with 21.94% vs 7.66% for GDMA. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GDMA has been the lower-risk option at 6.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, NLR has performed better with a 21.94% return vs 7.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NLR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for GDMA.

GDMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 2.40% for NLR.

GDMA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 0.60% for NLR.

GDMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GDMA 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