MEMX vs. NUKZ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

MEMX (Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF) and NUKZ (Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MEMX is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Matthews, while NUKZ is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. MEMX is actively managed, while NUKZ is passively managed. Over the past year, MEMX returned 72.52% vs 46.32% for NUKZ. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MEMX charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for NUKZ.

Performance

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF (MEMX) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEMX achieves a 34.37% return, which is significantly higher than NUKZ's 16.31% return.

MEMX

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 11.98%
• YTD: 34.37%
• 6M: 44.33%
• 1Y: 72.52%
• 3Y*: 27.36%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NUKZ

• 1D: 2.23%
• 1M: 1.39%
• YTD: 16.31%
• 6M: 15.14%
• 1Y: 46.32%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MEMX Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF	34.37%	35.88%	7.89%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	16.31%	56.57%	62.98%

Correlation

The correlation between MEMX and NUKZ is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.61

The correlation between MEMX and NUKZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MEMX	NUKZ
Technology	39.5%	1.4%
Financial Services	25.1%	-
Industrials	9.6%	45.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	-
Healthcare	4.5%	-
Communication Services	3.4%	-
Energy	2.8%	12.9%
Basic Materials	2.6%	4.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-
Real Estate	1.5%	-
Utilities	1.1%	35.8%

Return for Risk

MEMX vs. NUKZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

MEMX

MEMX Risk / Return Rank: 90
MEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
MEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
MEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 90
MEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
MEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 89

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 46
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 39
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF (MEMX) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). 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.

	MEMX	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.39	1.57	+1.82
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.20	2.21	+2.00
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.26	+0.34
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.01	2.85	+2.16
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.00	7.20	+12.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEMX Sharpe Ratio is 3.39, which is higher than the NUKZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEMX and NUKZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MEMX	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.39	1.57	+1.82
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.47	1.81	-0.34

Drawdowns

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEMX drawdown since its inception was -19.27%, smaller than the maximum NUKZ drawdown of -33.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEMX and NUKZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEMX	NUKZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.27%	-33.03%	+13.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.70%	-16.51%	+1.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-3.11%	+3.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.49%	-6.01%	+2.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.68%	6.54%	-2.86%

Volatility

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF (MEMX) is 9.32%, while Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) has a volatility of 9.95%. This indicates that MEMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NUKZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MEMX	NUKZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.32%	9.95%	-0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.01%	22.02%	-3.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.50%	29.61%	-8.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.09%	32.67%	-15.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.09%	32.67%	-15.58%

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEMX has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than NUKZ's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

MEMX vs. NUKZ - Dividend Comparison

MEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.63%, more than NUKZ's 0.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MEMX Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF	3.63%	4.88%	0.99%	1.13%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.78%	0.91%	0.09%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEMX and NUKZ in my portfolio?

MEMX and NUKZ have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MEMX or NUKZ?

NUKZ has higher volatility (9.95%) compared to MEMX (9.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEMX dropped -19.27% vs NUKZ's -33.03%.

Which ETF is better, MEMX or NUKZ?

On 1-year performance, MEMX leads with 72.52% vs 46.32% for NUKZ. On fees, MEMX is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, MEMX has been the lower-risk option at 9.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MEMX or NUKZ?

Over the 1-year period, MEMX has performed better with a 72.52% return vs 46.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEMX or NUKZ?

MEMX is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MEMX or NUKZ?

MEMX has the higher dividend yield at 3.63%, compared with 0.78% for NUKZ.

What is the main difference between MEMX and NUKZ?

MEMX is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while NUKZ is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MEMX and 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.39 vs 1.57), 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.