GDXJ vs. NLR
GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GDXJ returned 8.32%/yr vs 10.63%/yr for NLR. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GDXJ charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
GDXJ vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GDXJ achieves a -18.57% return, which is significantly lower than NLR's -15.72% return. Over the past 10 years, GDXJ has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 8.32%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 10.63% annualized return.
GDXJ
- 1D
- -4.04%
- 1M
- -19.04%
- 6M
- -27.13%
- YTD
- -18.57%
- 1Y
- 40.44%
- 3Y*
- 36.46%
- 5Y*
- 17.45%
- 10Y*
- 8.32%
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%
GDXJ vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | -18.57% | 172.28% | 15.67% | 7.12% | -14.53% | -21.25% | 30.40% | 40.44% | -11.02% | 8.22% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -15.72% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between GDXJ and NLR is 0.54, 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 | 0.54 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2009 | 0.35 |
The correlation between GDXJ and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (10 years) to 0.54 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GDXJ vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GDXJ
NLR
Basic Materials
Financial Services
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
GDXJ
NLR
Financial Services
GDXJ
NLR
-
Communication Services
GDXJ
-
NLR
-
Consumer Cyclical
GDXJ
-
NLR
-
Consumer Defensive
GDXJ
-
NLR
-
Energy
GDXJ
-
NLR
Healthcare
GDXJ
-
NLR
-
Industrials
GDXJ
-
NLR
Real Estate
GDXJ
-
NLR
-
Technology
GDXJ
-
NLR
Utilities
GDXJ
-
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
GDXJ vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
GDXJ
NLR
GDXJ vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) 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.
| GDXJ | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.01 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.00 | -0.17 | +1.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.29 | -0.39 | +2.68 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GDXJ vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GDXJ drawdown since its inception was -88.66%, which is greater than NLR's maximum drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDXJ and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GDXJ | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -88.66% | -65.05% | -23.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -40.68% | -36.32% | -4.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -40.68% | -36.32% | -4.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.79% | -36.32% | -12.47% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.77% | -36.32% | -21.45% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -40.68% | -36.32% | -4.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -60.32% | -35.67% | -24.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 17.74% | 15.87% | +1.87% |
Volatility
GDXJ vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a higher volatility of 14.07% compared to VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) at 9.39%. This indicates that GDXJ'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GDXJ | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.07% | 9.39% | +4.68% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 44.66% | 32.73% | +11.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 53.34% | 43.21% | +10.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 41.93% | 29.90% | +12.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 44.27% | 24.42% | +19.85% |
GDXJ vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
GDXJ has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
GDXJ vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
GDXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than NLR's 3.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | 2.86% | 2.33% | 2.61% | 0.72% | 0.51% | 1.78% | 1.58% | 0.39% | 0.45% | 0.03% | 4.78% | 0.72% |
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
GDXJ and NLR have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXJ has higher volatility (14.07%) compared to NLR (9.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDXJ dropped -88.66% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 10.63% vs 8.32% for GDXJ. On fees, GDXJ is cheaper at 0.52% 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.
Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 10.63% return vs 8.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GDXJ is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 3.02%, compared with 2.86% for GDXJ.
GDXJ is categorized as Gold, while NLR is Uranium. GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for GDXJ and 0.56% for NLR.
GDXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.76 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.
Find the right allocation for GDXJ 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