PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LLDR vs. URA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LLDR vs. URA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Long-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (LLDR) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LLDR achieves a -1.43% return, which is significantly higher than URA's -9.50% return.


LLDR

1D
-0.59%
1M
-2.24%
6M
-1.88%
YTD
-1.43%
1Y
3.36%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
-3.06%

URA

1D
-0.15%
1M
-19.07%
6M
-28.92%
YTD
-9.50%
1Y
-1.01%
3Y*
26.75%
5Y*
19.09%
10Y*
14.22%
ALL TIME*
-3.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LLDR vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
LLDR
Global X Long-Term Treasury Ladder ETF
-1.43%5.69%-9.39%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
-9.50%67.18%16.60%

Correlation

The correlation between LLDR and URA is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2024

0.06

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

LLDR vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank

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

LLDR
LLDR Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
LLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
LLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
LLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
LLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

URA
URA Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
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.

LLDR vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Long-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (LLDR) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). 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.


LLDRURADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.04

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.48

-0.03

+0.51

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.16

-0.06

+1.22

LLDR vs. URA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LLDR Sharpe Ratio is 0.41, which is higher than the URA Sharpe Ratio of -0.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LLDR and URA, 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

LLDR vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LLDR drawdown since its inception was -12.46%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LLDR and URA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LLDRURADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.46%

-93.54%

+81.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.00%

-37.44%

+30.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-37.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.64%

-56.11%

+49.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.41%

-74.79%

+68.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.90%

16.89%

-13.99%

Volatility

LLDR vs. URA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Long-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (LLDR) is 2.37%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 9.88%. This indicates that LLDR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LLDRURADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.37%

9.88%

-7.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.17%

38.88%

-32.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.26%

51.67%

-43.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.99%

44.00%

-34.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.99%

38.01%

-28.02%

LLDR vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison

LLDR has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

LLDR vs. URA - Dividend Comparison

LLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.69%, less than URA's 5.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LLDR
Global X Long-Term Treasury Ladder ETF
4.69%4.42%1.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
5.39%4.88%2.86%6.07%0.76%5.84%1.69%1.66%0.44%2.03%7.28%1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions


LLDR and URA have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URA has higher volatility (9.88%) compared to LLDR (2.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LLDR dropped -12.46% vs URA's -93.54%.

On 1-year performance, LLDR leads with 3.36% vs -1.01% for URA. On fees, LLDR is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, LLDR has been the lower-risk option at 2.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LLDR has performed better with a 3.36% return vs -1.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LLDR is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

URA has the higher dividend yield at 5.39%, compared with 4.69% for LLDR.

LLDR is categorized as Government Bonds, while URA is Uranium. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for LLDR and 0.69% for URA.

LLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.41 vs -0.02), 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 LLDR and URA

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