NLR vs. COPJ
NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) and COPJ (Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NLR is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while COPJ is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Sprott Junior Copper Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NLR returned 31.16%/yr vs 40.03%/yr for COPJ. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NLR charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.78%/yr for COPJ.
Performance
NLR vs. COPJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NLR achieves a -0.79% return, which is significantly lower than COPJ's 2.88% return.
NLR
- 1D
- 0.91%
- 1M
- -12.54%
- YTD
- -0.79%
- 6M
- -6.08%
- 1Y
- 26.72%
- 3Y*
- 31.16%
- 5Y*
- 20.16%
- 10Y*
- 12.72%
COPJ
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -7.29%
- YTD
- 2.88%
- 6M
- 14.73%
- 1Y
- 92.31%
- 3Y*
- 40.03%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NLR vs. COPJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -0.79% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 28.31% |
COPJ Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF | 2.88% | 140.63% | 11.07% | -5.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between NLR and COPJ is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2023 | 0.53 |
The correlation between NLR and COPJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
NLR vs. COPJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NLR
COPJ
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
-
Technology
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Energy
NLR
COPJ
-
Utilities
NLR
COPJ
-
Industrials
NLR
COPJ
-
Technology
NLR
COPJ
Basic Materials
NLR
-
COPJ
Communication Services
NLR
-
COPJ
-
Consumer Cyclical
NLR
-
COPJ
-
Consumer Defensive
NLR
-
COPJ
-
Financial Services
NLR
-
COPJ
-
Healthcare
NLR
-
COPJ
-
Real Estate
NLR
-
COPJ
-
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
NLR vs. COPJ — Risk / Return Rank
NLR
COPJ
NLR vs. COPJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF (COPJ). 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.
| NLR | COPJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.50 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.35 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.04 | 2.88 | -1.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.08 | 8.26 | -6.18 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NLR | COPJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.63 | 2.13 | -1.50 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.16 | 0.95 | -0.79 |
Drawdowns
NLR vs. COPJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NLR drawdown since its inception was -65.05%, which is greater than COPJ's maximum drawdown of -32.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NLR and COPJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NLR | COPJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.05% | -32.28% | -32.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.80% | -32.28% | +6.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.48% | -32.28% | +1.80% |
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 | -25.03% | -21.36% | -3.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.71% | -11.88% | -23.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 12.87% | 11.21% | +1.66% |
Volatility
NLR vs. COPJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) is 13.36%, while Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF (COPJ) has a volatility of 18.39%. This indicates that NLR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COPJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NLR | COPJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.36% | 18.39% | -5.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 33.24% | 37.05% | -3.81% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 42.96% | 43.71% | -0.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.43% | 35.26% | -5.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.14% | 35.26% | -11.12% |
NLR vs. COPJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
NLR has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than COPJ's 0.78% expense ratio.
Dividends
NLR vs. COPJ - Dividend Comparison
NLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.57%, less than COPJ's 11.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COPJ Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF | 11.25% | 11.57% | 11.64% | 2.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 2.57% | 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
NLR and COPJ have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COPJ has higher volatility (18.39%) compared to NLR (13.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NLR dropped -65.05% vs COPJ's -32.28%.
On 3-year performance, COPJ leads with 40.03% vs 31.16% for NLR. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, NLR has been the lower-risk option at 13.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, COPJ has performed better with a 40.03% return vs 31.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for COPJ.
COPJ has the higher dividend yield at 11.25%, compared with 2.57% for NLR.
NLR is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while COPJ is Commodity Producers Equities. NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while COPJ tracks Nasdaq Sprott Junior Copper Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NLR and 0.78% for COPJ.
COPJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 0.63), 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 NLR and COPJ
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