PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IGF vs. NLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IGF vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) 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, IGF achieves a 7.07% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -0.79% return. Over the past 10 years, IGF has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 8.26%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 12.72% annualized return.


IGF

1D
-0.73%
1M
-1.91%
YTD
7.07%
6M
8.23%
1Y
13.89%
3Y*
15.43%
5Y*
9.75%
10Y*
8.26%

NLR

1D
0.91%
1M
-12.54%
YTD
-0.79%
6M
-6.08%
1Y
26.72%
3Y*
31.16%
5Y*
20.16%
10Y*
12.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IGF vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
7.07%21.31%14.81%6.14%-1.26%11.57%-6.50%25.82%-9.95%19.31%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
-0.79%56.50%14.26%36.67%2.29%13.63%3.49%0.20%4.94%8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between IGF and NLR is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.45

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.57

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2007

0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between IGF and NLR has dropped to 0.35 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IGF vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IGF
NLR

Utilities

41.1%
37.4%

Industrials

38.8%
15.1%

Energy

20.1%
46.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Technology

-

1.5%

Utilities

IGF
41.1%
NLR
37.4%

Industrials

IGF
38.8%
NLR
15.1%

Energy

IGF
20.1%
NLR
46.0%

Real Estate

IGF
0.1%
NLR

-

Basic Materials

IGF

-

NLR

-

Communication Services

IGF

-

NLR

-

Consumer Cyclical

IGF

-

NLR

-

Consumer Defensive

IGF

-

NLR

-

Financial Services

IGF

-

NLR

-

Healthcare

IGF

-

NLR

-

Technology

IGF

-

NLR
1.5%

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

IGF vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IGF
IGF Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IGF vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) 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.


IGFNLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.78

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.13

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.38

1.04

+1.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.08

2.08

+5.00

IGF vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.32, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IGF 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IGFNLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.32

0.63

+0.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

0.69

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

0.53

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.23

0.16

+0.07

Drawdowns

IGF vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IGF drawdown since its inception was -58.33%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGF and NLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IGFNLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.33%

-65.05%

+6.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.87%

-25.80%

+19.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.28%

-30.48%

+16.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.83%

-30.48%

+9.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.11%

-34.35%

-7.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.29%

-25.03%

+19.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.87%

-35.71%

+23.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.97%

12.87%

-10.90%

Volatility

IGF vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) is 3.61%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.36%. This indicates that IGF 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


IGFNLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.61%

13.36%

-9.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.68%

33.24%

-24.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.56%

42.96%

-32.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.00%

29.43%

-15.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.84%

24.14%

-7.30%

IGF vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

IGF vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.01%, more than NLR's 2.57% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
3.01%3.23%3.21%3.36%2.67%2.42%2.33%3.27%3.52%2.95%2.98%3.25%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
2.57%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


IGF and NLR have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NLR has higher volatility (13.36%) compared to IGF (3.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGF dropped -58.33% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 12.72% vs 8.26% for IGF. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 3.61%. 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 12.72% return vs 8.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

IGF has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 2.57% for NLR.

IGF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure 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 IGF and 0.56% for NLR.

IGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs 0.63), 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 IGF 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