ICLN vs. NLR

Last updated Jul 26, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 8.54%/yr vs 10.96%/yr for NLR. Their 0.54 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ICLN charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

ICLN vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) 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, ICLN achieves a 8.51% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -12.96% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 8.54%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 10.96% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: -3.21%
• 1M: -12.37%
• 6M: -2.42%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 1Y: 28.61%
• 3Y*: -0.23%
• 5Y*: -3.38%
• 10Y*: 8.54%
• ALL TIME*: -3.87%

NLR

• 1D: -2.97%
• 1M: -7.91%
• 6M: -29.25%
• YTD: -12.96%
• 1Y: -8.40%
• 3Y*: 23.96%
• 5Y*: 18.37%
• 10Y*: 10.96%
• ALL TIME*: 3.36%

*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)
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	$75.84M	$93.70M	$122.85M
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	$52.35M	$49.22M	$61.68M

ICLN vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	8.51%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	-12.96%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.29%	13.63%	3.49%	0.20%	4.94%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and NLR is 0.62, 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.	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.47
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.51
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.54

The correlation between ICLN and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (10 years) to 0.62 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ICLN vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	NLR
Utilities	40.4%	31.5%
Technology	24.7%	1.6%
Industrials	22.8%	17.1%
Energy	8.9%	50.0%
Basic Materials	1.6%	2.3%
Financial Services	0.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 38
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 36
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 39

NLR

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

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.

ICLN vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) 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.

	ICLN	NLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	-0.19	+1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.44	0.03	+1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.00	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.17	-0.22	+1.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.96	-0.48	+4.44

ICLN vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of -0.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN 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

ICLN vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, which is greater than NLR's maximum drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and NLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	NLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-65.05%	-22.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.94%	-36.61%	+11.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-40.82%	-36.61%	-4.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-36.61%	-20.55%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-36.61%	-30.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-51.46%	-34.23%	-17.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.44%	-35.67%	-30.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.36%	16.73%	-9.37%

Volatility

ICLN vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) have volatilities of 10.43% and 10.60%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	NLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.43%	10.60%	-0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.87%	32.75%	-7.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.01%	43.30%	-13.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.94%	29.96%	-2.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.45%	24.47%	+2.98%

ICLN vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLN vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than NLR's 2.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.04%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	2.93%	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 ICLN and NLR in my portfolio?

ICLN and NLR have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ICLN or NLR?

NLR has higher volatility (10.60%) compared to ICLN (10.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs NLR's -65.05%.

Which ETF is better, ICLN or NLR?

On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 10.96% vs 8.54% for ICLN. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ICLN has been the lower-risk option at 10.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLN or NLR?

Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 10.96% return vs 8.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLN or NLR?

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

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

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 1.04% for ICLN.

What is the main difference between ICLN and NLR?

ICLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while NLR is Uranium. ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ICLN and 0.56% for NLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.97 vs -0.19), 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.