IGF vs. NLR
IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IGF returned 8.09%/yr vs 10.66%/yr for NLR. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IGF charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
IGF vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IGF achieves a 10.15% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -15.40% return. Over the past 10 years, IGF has underperformed NLR with an annualized return of 8.09%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively higher 10.66% annualized return.
IGF
- 1D
- -0.43%
- 1M
- 0.44%
- 6M
- 8.59%
- YTD
- 10.15%
- 1Y
- 16.18%
- 3Y*
- 15.34%
- 5Y*
- 11.33%
- 10Y*
- 8.09%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.91%
NLR
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- -17.23%
- 6M
- -29.26%
- YTD
- -15.40%
- 1Y
- -8.06%
- 3Y*
- 23.46%
- 5Y*
- 17.81%
- 10Y*
- 10.66%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.20%
IGF vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 10.15% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 6.14% | -1.26% | 11.57% | -6.50% | 25.82% | -9.95% | 19.31% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -15.40% | 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 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2007 | 0.66 |
Over the past year, the correlation between IGF and NLR has dropped to 0.32 - 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
Industrials
Energy
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
IGF
NLR
Industrials
IGF
NLR
Energy
IGF
NLR
Real Estate
IGF
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
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
IGF
NLR
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.
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.
| IGF | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.72 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.00 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.77 | -0.22 | +2.99 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.55 | -0.50 | +8.05 |
Loading charts...
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
| IGF | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.33% | -65.05% | +6.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.87% | -36.61% | +30.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.28% | -36.61% | +22.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.83% | -36.61% | +15.78% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.11% | -36.61% | -5.50% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.57% | -36.08% | +33.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.81% | -35.67% | +23.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.15% | 16.20% | -14.05% |
Volatility
IGF vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) is 2.85%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 9.51%. 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
| IGF | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.85% | 9.51% | -6.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.93% | 32.62% | -23.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.63% | 43.18% | -32.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.93% | 29.88% | -15.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.71% | 24.43% | -7.72% |
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 2.89%, less than NLR's 3.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.89% | 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 | 3.01% | 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 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (9.51%) compared to IGF (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGF dropped -58.33% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 10.66% vs 8.09% for IGF. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 2.85%. 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 10.66% return vs 8.09%. 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.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 2.89% for IGF.
IGF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while NLR is Uranium. IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), 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 (1.53 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.
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