MOAT vs. NLR
MOAT (VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MOAT is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MOAT returned 13.76%/yr vs 12.70%/yr for NLR. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MOAT charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
MOAT vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MOAT achieves a -1.37% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -3.82% return. Over the past 10 years, MOAT has outperformed NLR with an annualized return of 13.76%, while NLR has yielded a comparatively lower 12.70% annualized return.
MOAT
- 1D
- 1.05%
- 1M
- -0.10%
- YTD
- -1.37%
- 6M
- -2.45%
- 1Y
- 11.95%
- 3Y*
- 10.75%
- 5Y*
- 7.84%
- 10Y*
- 13.76%
NLR
- 1D
- -2.41%
- 1M
- -8.71%
- YTD
- -3.82%
- 6M
- -7.14%
- 1Y
- 10.28%
- 3Y*
- 30.47%
- 5Y*
- 20.31%
- 10Y*
- 12.70%
MOAT vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | -1.37% | 13.20% | 10.73% | 31.89% | -13.66% | 24.12% | 14.84% | 34.79% | -1.28% | 23.18% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -3.82% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between MOAT and NLR is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2012 | 0.50 |
The correlation between MOAT and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
MOAT vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MOAT
NLR
Technology
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
Financial Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Communication Services
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
MOAT
NLR
Consumer Defensive
MOAT
NLR
-
Healthcare
MOAT
NLR
-
Industrials
MOAT
NLR
Financial Services
MOAT
NLR
-
Consumer Cyclical
MOAT
NLR
-
Communication Services
MOAT
NLR
-
Real Estate
MOAT
NLR
-
Basic Materials
MOAT
-
NLR
-
Energy
MOAT
-
NLR
Utilities
MOAT
-
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
MOAT vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
MOAT
NLR
MOAT vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) 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.
| MOAT | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.07 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.97 | 0.35 | +0.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.89 | 0.74 | +2.15 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MOAT vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MOAT drawdown since its inception was -33.31%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOAT and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MOAT | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.31% | -65.05% | +31.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.43% | -29.72% | +17.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.44% | -30.48% | +9.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.96% | -30.48% | +6.52% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.31% | -34.35% | +1.04% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.14% | -27.33% | +22.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.83% | -35.68% | +31.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.14% | 13.94% | -9.80% |
Volatility
MOAT vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) is 4.73%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.71%. This indicates that MOAT 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
| MOAT | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.73% | 13.71% | -8.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.28% | 32.79% | -22.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.00% | 42.87% | -28.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.24% | 29.65% | -11.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.65% | 24.27% | -5.62% |
MOAT vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MOAT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
MOAT vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
MOAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than NLR's 2.65% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | 1.37% | 1.36% | 1.37% | 0.86% | 1.25% | 1.08% | 1.46% | 1.31% | 1.79% | 1.07% | 1.17% | 2.13% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 2.65% | 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
MOAT and NLR have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (13.71%) compared to MOAT (4.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOAT dropped -33.31% vs NLR's -65.05%.
On 10-year performance, MOAT leads with 13.76% vs 12.70% for NLR. On fees, MOAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, MOAT has been the lower-risk option at 4.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MOAT has performed better with a 13.76% return vs 12.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MOAT is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.65%, compared with 1.37% for MOAT.
MOAT is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while NLR is Uranium. MOAT tracks Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for MOAT and 0.56% for NLR.
MOAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.86 vs 0.24), 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 MOAT 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