MAGS vs. NLR
MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while NLR is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. MAGS is actively managed, while NLR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MAGS returned 31.29%/yr vs 29.88%/yr for NLR. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MAGS charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
MAGS vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MAGS achieves a -1.59% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -1.81% return.
MAGS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -7.97%
- YTD
- -1.59%
- 6M
- -0.43%
- 1Y
- 23.09%
- 3Y*
- 31.29%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NLR
- 1D
- 0.84%
- 1M
- -10.59%
- YTD
- -1.81%
- 6M
- -3.70%
- 1Y
- 18.72%
- 3Y*
- 29.88%
- 5Y*
- 19.78%
- 10Y*
- 12.80%
MAGS vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | -1.59% | 22.99% | 63.97% | 35.74% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -1.81% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between MAGS and NLR is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2023 | 0.40 |
MAGS vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MAGS
NLR
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
Technology
MAGS
NLR
Consumer Cyclical
MAGS
NLR
-
Communication Services
MAGS
NLR
-
Basic Materials
MAGS
-
NLR
-
Consumer Defensive
MAGS
-
NLR
-
Energy
MAGS
-
NLR
Financial Services
MAGS
-
NLR
-
Healthcare
MAGS
-
NLR
-
Industrials
MAGS
-
NLR
Real Estate
MAGS
-
NLR
-
Utilities
MAGS
-
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
MAGS vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
MAGS
NLR
MAGS vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) 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.
| MAGS | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.70 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.10 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.25 | 0.63 | +0.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.21 | 1.41 | +2.80 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MAGS vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MAGS drawdown since its inception was -29.91%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAGS and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MAGS | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.91% | -65.05% | +35.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.62% | -29.72% | +11.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.91% | -30.48% | +0.57% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.48% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.50% | -25.81% | +17.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.72% | -35.70% | +30.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.50% | 13.33% | -7.83% |
Volatility
MAGS vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) is 5.86%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.73%. This indicates that MAGS 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
| MAGS | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.86% | 13.73% | -7.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.07% | 33.75% | -18.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.30% | 42.85% | -22.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.97% | 29.56% | -3.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.97% | 24.22% | +1.75% |
MAGS vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MAGS has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
MAGS vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
MAGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, less than NLR's 2.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | 1.50% | 1.48% | 0.81% | 0.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 2.60% | 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
MAGS and NLR have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (13.73%) compared to MAGS (5.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAGS dropped -29.91% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 3-year performance, MAGS leads with 31.29% vs 29.88% for NLR. On fees, MAGS is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, MAGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, MAGS has performed better with a 31.29% return vs 29.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MAGS is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 1.50% for MAGS.
MAGS is categorized as Technology Equities, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for MAGS and 0.56% for NLR.
MAGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.14 vs 0.44), 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 MAGS 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