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

Performance

LCTD vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTD) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LCTD having a 6.33% return and NLR slightly lower at 6.14%.


LCTD

1D
-0.76%
1M
1.69%
YTD
6.33%
6M
8.97%
1Y
19.28%
3Y*
14.96%
5Y*
6.77%
10Y*

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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LCTD vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
LCTD
BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
6.33%30.42%3.14%17.10%-16.16%4.36%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
6.14%56.50%14.26%36.67%2.29%4.83%

Correlation

The correlation between LCTD and NLR is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.47

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

0.50

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 9, 2021

0.59

The correlation between LCTD and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

LCTD vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LCTD
NLR

Financial Services

26.7%

-

Industrials

19.5%
15.1%

Healthcare

9.3%

-

Technology

9.1%
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

6.0%

-

Basic Materials

5.8%

-

Energy

5.8%
46.0%

Utilities

4.0%
37.4%

Communication Services

3.5%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Financial Services

LCTD
26.7%
NLR

-

Industrials

LCTD
19.5%
NLR
15.1%

Healthcare

LCTD
9.3%
NLR

-

Technology

LCTD
9.1%
NLR
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

LCTD
8.4%
NLR

-

Consumer Defensive

LCTD
6.0%
NLR

-

Basic Materials

LCTD
5.8%
NLR

-

Energy

LCTD
5.8%
NLR
46.0%

Utilities

LCTD
4.0%
NLR
37.4%

Communication Services

LCTD
3.5%
NLR

-

Real Estate

LCTD
1.9%
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

LCTD vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCTD
LCTD Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
LCTD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3737
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCTD Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCTD Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
LCTD Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCTD Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.

LCTD vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTD) 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.


LCTDNLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.46

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.17

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.77

1.43

+0.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.39

2.93

+3.46

LCTD vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCTD Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCTD 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


LCTDNLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.33

0.88

+0.46

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

0.75

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.18

+0.31

Drawdowns

LCTD vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCTD drawdown since its inception was -29.82%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCTD and NLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LCTDNLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.82%

-65.05%

+35.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.92%

-25.80%

+14.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.59%

-30.48%

+16.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.82%

-30.48%

+0.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.23%

-19.80%

+16.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.79%

-35.72%

+28.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.03%

12.61%

-9.58%

Volatility

LCTD vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTD) is 4.31%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.18%. This indicates that LCTD 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


LCTDNLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

13.18%

-8.87%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.99%

32.83%

-20.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.55%

42.32%

-27.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.14%

29.24%

-13.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.06%

24.02%

-7.96%

LCTD vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCTD has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.


Dividends

LCTD vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

LCTD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.40%, more than NLR's 2.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LCTD
BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
3.40%3.61%3.74%3.16%3.52%2.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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


LCTD and NLR have a correlation of 0.47, 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 LCTD (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCTD dropped -29.82% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 5-year performance, NLR leads with 21.94% vs 6.77% for LCTD. On fees, LCTD is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, LCTD has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, NLR has performed better with a 21.94% return vs 6.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LCTD is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

LCTD has the higher dividend yield at 3.40%, compared with 2.40% for NLR.

They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LCTD and 0.56% for NLR.

LCTD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.33 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LCTD 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