HAP vs. NLR
HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HAP is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index, while NLR is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HAP returned 11.99%/yr vs 13.66%/yr for NLR. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HAP charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
HAP vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HAP achieves a 21.49% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's 6.14% return. Over the past 10 years, HAP has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 11.99%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 13.66% annualized return.
HAP
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 0.64%
- YTD
- 21.49%
- 6M
- 23.70%
- 1Y
- 46.66%
- 3Y*
- 18.93%
- 5Y*
- 11.51%
- 10Y*
- 11.99%
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%
HAP vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF | 21.49% | 34.91% | -4.08% | 2.46% | 7.84% | 25.04% | 6.30% | 18.60% | -10.68% | 17.12% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 6.14% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between HAP and NLR is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 4, 2008 | 0.61 |
The correlation between HAP and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (1 year) to 0.61 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
HAP vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HAP
NLR
Basic Materials
-
Energy
Industrials
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
Real Estate
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Basic Materials
HAP
NLR
-
Energy
HAP
NLR
Industrials
HAP
NLR
Utilities
HAP
NLR
Consumer Defensive
HAP
NLR
-
Healthcare
HAP
NLR
-
Technology
HAP
NLR
Real Estate
HAP
NLR
-
Consumer Cyclical
HAP
NLR
-
Communication Services
HAP
-
NLR
-
Financial Services
HAP
-
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
HAP vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
HAP
NLR
HAP vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) 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.
| HAP | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.58 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | 1.17 | +0.40 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.65 | 1.43 | +4.21 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.05 | 2.93 | +20.12 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HAP | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.14 | 0.88 | +2.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.63 | 0.75 | -0.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | 0.57 | +0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.26 | 0.18 | +0.08 |
Drawdowns
HAP vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HAP drawdown since its inception was -50.73%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HAP and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HAP | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.73% | -65.05% | +14.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.31% | -25.80% | +17.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.92% | -30.48% | +13.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | -30.48% | +4.82% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.07% | -34.35% | -9.72% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.95% | -19.80% | +17.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.03% | -35.72% | +23.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | 12.61% | -10.58% |
Volatility
HAP vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) is 4.37%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that HAP 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
| HAP | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.37% | 13.18% | -8.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.24% | 32.83% | -20.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.91% | 42.32% | -27.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.24% | 29.24% | -11.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.74% | 24.02% | -4.28% |
HAP vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
HAP has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
HAP vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
HAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.87%, less than NLR's 2.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF | 1.87% | 2.27% | 2.65% | 3.27% | 3.28% | 2.16% | 2.45% | 2.80% | 2.85% | 2.02% | 1.99% | 3.00% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear 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
HAP and NLR have a correlation of 0.45, 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 HAP (4.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HAP dropped -50.73% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 13.66% vs 11.99% for HAP. On fees, HAP is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, HAP has been the lower-risk option at 4.37%. 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 13.66% return vs 11.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
HAP is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 1.87% for HAP.
HAP is categorized as Energy Equities, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. HAP tracks MarketVector Global Natural Resources Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for HAP and 0.56% for NLR.
HAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.14 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.
Find the right allocation for HAP 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