NIKL vs. ION

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NIKL (Sprott Nickel Miners ETF) and ION (Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - NIKL tracks the Nasdaq Sprott Nickel Miners Index - Benchmark TR Gross while ION tracks the S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NIKL returned -3.02%/yr vs 18.23%/yr for ION. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NIKL charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for ION.

Performance

NIKL vs. ION - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Nickel Miners ETF (NIKL) and Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NIKL achieves a -7.50% return, which is significantly lower than ION's 11.94% return.

NIKL

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: -13.19%
• YTD: -7.50%
• 6M: 4.95%
• 1Y: 27.58%
• 3Y*: -3.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ION

• 1D: -1.83%
• 1M: -11.66%
• YTD: 11.94%
• 6M: 26.66%
• 1Y: 112.51%
• 3Y*: 18.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NIKL vs. ION - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NIKL Sprott Nickel Miners ETF	-7.50%	52.05%	-22.48%	-17.88%
ION Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF	11.94%	108.37%	-20.02%	-8.64%

Correlation

The correlation between NIKL and ION is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2023	0.66

The correlation between NIKL and ION has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

NIKL vs. ION - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NIKL	ION
Basic Materials	100.0%	14.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	2.4%
Financial Services	-	13.0%
Healthcare	-	1.7%
Industrials	-	1.6%
Real Estate	-	2.4%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NIKL vs. ION — Risk / Return Rank

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

NIKL

NIKL Risk / Return Rank: 21
NIKL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
NIKL Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
NIKL Omega Ratio Rank: 22
NIKL Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
NIKL Martin Ratio Rank: 20

ION

ION Risk / Return Rank: 81
ION Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
ION Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
ION Omega Ratio Rank: 73
ION Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
ION Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

NIKL vs. ION - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Nickel Miners ETF (NIKL) and Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION). 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.

	NIKL	ION	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.66	2.99	-2.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.17	3.25	-2.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.42	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.93	4.86	-3.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.23	16.95	-14.72
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NIKL vs. ION - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NIKL Sharpe Ratio is 0.66, which is lower than the ION Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NIKL and ION, 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

	NIKL	ION	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.66	2.99	-2.33
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.10	0.37	-0.47

Drawdowns

NIKL vs. ION - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NIKL drawdown since its inception was -60.23%, which is greater than ION's maximum drawdown of -52.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NIKL and ION.

Drawdown Indicators

	NIKL	ION	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.23%	-52.08%	-8.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.87%	-23.30%	-6.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-60.23%	-46.47%	-13.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-29.33%	-15.56%	-13.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.58%	-23.69%	-2.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.42%	6.66%	+5.76%

Volatility

NIKL vs. ION - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Nickel Miners ETF (NIKL) has a higher volatility of 15.35% compared to Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION) at 12.06%. This indicates that NIKL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ION based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NIKL	ION	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.35%	12.06%	+3.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	35.55%	29.94%	+5.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.12%	37.98%	+4.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.60%	31.08%	+1.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.60%	31.08%	+1.52%

NIKL vs. ION - Expense Ratio Comparison

NIKL has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ION's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

NIKL vs. ION - Dividend Comparison

NIKL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.73%, more than ION's 1.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ION Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF	1.42%	1.63%	1.74%	2.23%	0.13%
NIKL Sprott Nickel Miners ETF	2.73%	2.53%	3.49%	19.52%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NIKL and ION in my portfolio?

NIKL and ION have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NIKL or ION?

NIKL has higher volatility (15.35%) compared to ION (12.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NIKL dropped -60.23% vs ION's -52.08%.

Which ETF is better, NIKL or ION?

On 3-year performance, ION leads with 18.23% vs -3.02% for NIKL. On fees, ION is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, ION has been the lower-risk option at 12.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NIKL or ION?

Over the 3-year period, ION has performed better with a 18.23% return vs -3.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NIKL or ION?

ION is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for NIKL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NIKL or ION?

NIKL has the higher dividend yield at 2.73%, compared with 1.42% for ION.

What is the main difference between NIKL and ION?

NIKL tracks Nasdaq Sprott Nickel Miners Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while ION tracks S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for NIKL and 0.58% for ION.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ION currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 0.66), 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.