PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ICOP vs. NLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ICOP vs. NLR

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

ICOP (iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICOP is a Copper fund tracking the STOXX Global Copper and Metals Mining Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ICOP returned 26.30%/yr vs 23.67%/yr for NLR. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ICOP charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

ICOP vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICOP achieves a 13.30% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -13.99% return.

ICOP

1D
-1.40%
1M
1.44%
6M
-1.66%
YTD
13.30%
1Y
75.25%
3Y*
26.30%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
28.98%

NLR

1D
-1.41%
1M
-7.05%
6M
-28.16%
YTD
-13.99%
1Y
-2.28%
3Y*
23.67%
5Y*
18.29%
10Y*
11.00%
ALL TIME*
3.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

ICOP

iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF
$3.24M$3.32M$5.52M

NLR

VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
$43.05M$48.38M$60.74M

ICOP vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
ICOP
iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF		13.30%78.01%1.10%8.08%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF		-13.99%56.50%14.26%27.11%

Correlation

The correlation between ICOP and NLR is 0.61, 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.

0.61

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2023

0.53

The correlation between ICOP and NLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

ICOP vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ICOP
NLR

Basic Materials

100.0%
2.3%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

49.8%

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

12.6%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

1.6%

Utilities

-

36.0%

Basic Materials

ICOP
100.0%
NLR
2.3%

Communication Services

ICOP

-

NLR

-

Consumer Cyclical

ICOP

-

NLR

-

Consumer Defensive

ICOP

-

NLR

-

Energy

ICOP

-

NLR
49.8%

Financial Services

ICOP

-

NLR

-

Healthcare

ICOP

-

NLR

-

Industrials

ICOP

-

NLR
12.6%

Real Estate

ICOP

-

NLR

-

Technology

ICOP

-

NLR
1.6%

Utilities

ICOP

-

NLR
36.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF

VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF

Often compared with ICOP:
ICOP vs. COPXICOP vs. CPERICOP vs. COPPICOP vs. PICKICOP vs. COPJICOP vs. IAUICOP vs. NIKL
Often compared with NLR:
NLR vs. URANLR vs. NUKZNLR vs. URNMNLR vs. OKLONLR vs. GRIDNLR vs. URANNLR vs. SMH

Return for Risk

ICOP vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
ICOP
ICOP Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
ICOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICOP Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
ICOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICOP Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ICOP vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP) 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.

ICOPNLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.85
-0.10

+1.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.29
0.16

+2.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.02

+0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.88

-0.12

+3.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.34

-0.26

+8.60

ICOP vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICOP Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of -0.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICOP 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...

Drawdowns

ICOP vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICOP drawdown since its inception was -38.67%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICOP and NLR.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ICOPNLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.67%

-65.05%

+26.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.13%

-37.52%

+11.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-38.67%

-37.52%

-1.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-37.52%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-37.52%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.92%

-35.01%

+21.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.76%

-35.67%

+23.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.99%

17.42%

-8.43%

Volatility

ICOP vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) have volatilities of 12.26% and 12.90%, 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ICOPNLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.26%

12.90%

-0.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

35.69%

32.42%

+3.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.68%

43.80%

-3.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

34.64%

30.13%

+4.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

34.64%

24.58%

+10.06%

ICOP vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICOP has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICOP vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

ICOP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, less than NLR's 2.96% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ICOP
iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF		1.79%2.08%1.87%2.15%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF		2.96%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

ICOP and NLR have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NLR has higher volatility (12.90%) compared to ICOP (12.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICOP dropped -38.67% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 3-year performance, ICOP leads with 26.30% vs 23.67% for NLR. On fees, ICOP is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, ICOP has been the lower-risk option at 12.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, ICOP has performed better with a 26.30% return vs 23.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ICOP is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 1.79% for ICOP.

ICOP is categorized as Copper, while NLR is Uranium. ICOP tracks STOXX Global Copper and Metals Mining Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for ICOP and 0.56% for NLR.

ICOP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs -0.10), 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 ICOP 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