LFEQ vs. NLR
LFEQ (VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LFEQ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Ned Davis Research CMG US Large Cap Long/Flat Index - USD, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LFEQ returned 8.90%/yr vs 18.29%/yr for NLR. Their 0.53 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LFEQ charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
LFEQ vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFEQ achieves a 9.84% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -13.99% return.
LFEQ
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- 6M
- 8.40%
- YTD
- 9.84%
- 1Y
- 20.95%
- 3Y*
- 15.35%
- 5Y*
- 8.90%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.53%
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%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $53.35K | $94.32K | $91.22K | |
| $43.05M | $48.38M | $60.74M |
LFEQ vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LFEQ VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF | 9.84% | 10.49% | 24.30% | 19.66% | -22.05% | 27.97% | 17.56% | 24.07% | -5.55% | 5.48% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -13.99% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | -0.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between LFEQ and NLR is 0.57, 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. | 0.57 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2017 | 0.53 |
The correlation between LFEQ and NLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.
LFEQ vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LFEQ
NLR
Technology
Financial Services
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
LFEQ
NLR
Financial Services
LFEQ
NLR
-
Communication Services
LFEQ
NLR
-
Consumer Cyclical
LFEQ
NLR
-
Healthcare
LFEQ
NLR
-
Industrials
LFEQ
NLR
Consumer Defensive
LFEQ
NLR
-
Energy
LFEQ
NLR
Utilities
LFEQ
NLR
Real Estate
LFEQ
NLR
-
Basic Materials
LFEQ
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
LFEQ vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
LFEQ
NLR
LFEQ vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF (LFEQ) 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.
| LFEQ | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.02 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.14 | -0.12 | +2.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.09 | -0.26 | +9.35 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LFEQ vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFEQ drawdown since its inception was -35.19%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFEQ and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFEQ | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.19% | -65.05% | +29.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.98% | -37.52% | +28.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.97% | -37.52% | +18.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.55% | -37.52% | +11.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -37.52% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.31% | -35.01% | +33.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.08% | -35.67% | +29.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.11% | 17.42% | -15.31% |
Volatility
LFEQ vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF (LFEQ) is 3.57%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 12.90%. This indicates that LFEQ 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
| LFEQ | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.57% | 12.90% | -9.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.08% | 32.42% | -22.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.85% | 43.80% | -30.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.47% | 30.13% | -15.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.53% | 24.58% | -7.05% |
LFEQ vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFEQ has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
LFEQ vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
LFEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, less than NLR's 2.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LFEQ VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF | 0.82% | 0.90% | 0.74% | 1.56% | 1.19% | 0.37% | 2.06% | 1.45% | 1.07% | 0.79% | 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
LFEQ and NLR have a correlation of 0.57, 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 LFEQ (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFEQ dropped -35.19% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 5-year performance, NLR leads with 18.29% vs 8.90% for LFEQ. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, LFEQ has been the lower-risk option at 3.57%. 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 18.29% return vs 8.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for LFEQ.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 0.82% for LFEQ.
LFEQ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while NLR is Uranium. LFEQ tracks Ned Davis Research CMG US Large Cap Long/Flat Index - USD, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for LFEQ and 0.56% for NLR.
LFEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.50 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.
Find the right allocation for LFEQ 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