GXTG vs. URA
GXTG (Global X Thematic Growth ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GXTG is a Global Equities fund tracking the Solactive Thematic Growth Index, while URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GXTG returned -12.79%/yr vs 21.67%/yr for URA. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GXTG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.
Performance
GXTG vs. URA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GXTG achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly higher than URA's -0.56% return.
GXTG
- 1D
- 3.13%
- 1M
- -3.78%
- 6M
- -0.36%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 1Y
- -4.66%
- 3Y*
- -2.08%
- 5Y*
- -12.79%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 0.19%
URA
- 1D
- 4.12%
- 1M
- -1.71%
- 6M
- -24.50%
- YTD
- -0.56%
- 1Y
- 12.73%
- 3Y*
- 29.59%
- 5Y*
- 21.67%
- 10Y*
- 15.67%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.84%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $123.03K | $106.22K | $198.85K | |
| $133.36M | $121.56M | $167.65M |
GXTG vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXTG Global X Thematic Growth ETF | 1.80% | 3.52% | -3.55% | 10.26% | -48.08% | 3.21% | 61.07% | 4.74% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | -0.56% | 67.18% | -0.58% | 46.25% | -11.32% | 57.57% | 41.33% | 1.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between GXTG and URA is 0.66, 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. | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.52 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2019 | 0.53 |
The correlation between GXTG and URA shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (3 years) to 0.66 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
GXTG vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GXTG
URA
Technology
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
Technology
GXTG
URA
Basic Materials
GXTG
URA
Utilities
GXTG
URA
Communication Services
GXTG
URA
-
Consumer Cyclical
GXTG
URA
-
Healthcare
GXTG
URA
-
Industrials
GXTG
URA
Real Estate
GXTG
URA
-
Financial Services
GXTG
URA
-
Consumer Defensive
GXTG
-
URA
-
Energy
GXTG
-
URA
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
GXTG vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank
GXTG
URA
GXTG vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Thematic Growth ETF (GXTG) 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.
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.
| GXTG | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.08 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.16 | 0.33 | -0.49 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.37 | 0.70 | -1.06 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GXTG vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GXTG drawdown since its inception was -67.81%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GXTG and URA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GXTG | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.81% | -93.54% | +25.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -29.14% | -39.30% | +10.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.14% | -39.30% | +10.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -61.17% | -39.30% | -21.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -61.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -59.76% | -51.78% | -7.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -43.43% | -74.74% | +31.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.71% | 18.34% | -5.63% |
Volatility
GXTG vs. URA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Thematic Growth ETF (GXTG) is 13.53%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 14.91%. This indicates that GXTG 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
| GXTG | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.53% | 14.91% | -1.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 25.87% | 38.05% | -12.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.66% | 52.45% | -20.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.78% | 44.18% | -15.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.15% | 38.16% | -8.01% |
GXTG vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison
GXTG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
GXTG vs. URA - Dividend Comparison
GXTG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%, less than URA's 4.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GXTG Global X Thematic Growth ETF | 1.47% | 1.40% | 1.08% | 1.99% | 1.48% | 1.56% | 0.48% | 0.31% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 4.91% | 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
GXTG and URA have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
URA has higher volatility (14.91%) compared to GXTG (13.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GXTG dropped -67.81% vs URA's -93.54%.
On 5-year performance, URA leads with 21.67% vs -12.79% for GXTG. On fees, GXTG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GXTG has been the lower-risk option at 13.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 21.67% return vs -12.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GXTG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.
URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.91%, compared with 1.47% for GXTG.
GXTG is categorized as Global Equities, while URA is Uranium. GXTG tracks Solactive Thematic Growth Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for GXTG and 0.69% for URA.
URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.24 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 GXTG 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