NLR vs. MOAT
NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) and MOAT (VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while MOAT is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, NLR returned 10.63%/yr vs 13.65%/yr for MOAT. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NLR charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for MOAT.
Performance
NLR vs. MOAT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NLR achieves a -15.72% return, which is significantly lower than MOAT's 3.89% return. Over the past 10 years, NLR has underperformed MOAT with an annualized return of 10.63%, while MOAT has yielded a comparatively higher 13.65% annualized return.
NLR
- 1D
- -4.31%
- 1M
- -16.00%
- 6M
- -27.85%
- YTD
- -15.72%
- 1Y
- -6.24%
- 3Y*
- 23.28%
- 5Y*
- 17.50%
- 10Y*
- 10.63%
MOAT
- 1D
- 1.36%
- 1M
- 3.84%
- 6M
- -0.07%
- YTD
- 3.89%
- 1Y
- 14.32%
- 3Y*
- 10.88%
- 5Y*
- 9.02%
- 10Y*
- 13.65%
NLR vs. MOAT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -15.72% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | 3.89% | 13.20% | 10.73% | 31.89% | -13.66% | 24.12% | 14.84% | 34.79% | -1.28% | 23.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between NLR and MOAT is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2012 | 0.49 |
The correlation between NLR and MOAT shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
NLR vs. MOAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NLR
MOAT
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Technology
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
NLR
MOAT
-
Utilities
NLR
MOAT
-
Industrials
NLR
MOAT
Basic Materials
NLR
MOAT
-
Technology
NLR
MOAT
Communication Services
NLR
-
MOAT
Consumer Cyclical
NLR
-
MOAT
Consumer Defensive
NLR
-
MOAT
Financial Services
NLR
-
MOAT
Healthcare
NLR
-
MOAT
Real Estate
NLR
-
MOAT
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. MOAT — Risk / Return Rank
NLR
MOAT
NLR vs. MOAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT). 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.
| NLR | MOAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.18 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.17 | 1.16 | -1.33 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.39 | 3.44 | -3.83 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NLR vs. MOAT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NLR drawdown since its inception was -65.05%, which is greater than MOAT's maximum drawdown of -33.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NLR and MOAT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NLR | MOAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.05% | -33.31% | -31.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.32% | -12.43% | -23.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -36.32% | -21.44% | -14.88% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.32% | -23.96% | -12.36% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.32% | -33.31% | -3.01% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.32% | -0.07% | -36.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.67% | -3.83% | -31.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.87% | 4.18% | +11.69% |
Volatility
NLR vs. MOAT - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a higher volatility of 9.39% compared to VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) at 4.16%. This indicates that NLR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MOAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NLR | MOAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.39% | 4.16% | +5.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 32.73% | 10.34% | +22.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.21% | 13.91% | +29.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.90% | 18.27% | +11.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.42% | 18.60% | +5.82% |
NLR vs. MOAT - Expense Ratio Comparison
NLR has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than MOAT's 0.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
NLR vs. MOAT - Dividend Comparison
NLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.02%, more than MOAT's 1.30% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | 1.30% | 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 | 3.02% | 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 MOAT have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (9.39%) compared to MOAT (4.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NLR dropped -65.05% vs MOAT's -33.31%.
On 10-year performance, MOAT leads with 13.65% vs 10.63% for NLR. On fees, MOAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, MOAT has been the lower-risk option at 4.16%. 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 13.65% return vs 10.63%. 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 3.02%, compared with 1.30% for MOAT.
NLR is categorized as Uranium, while MOAT is Large Cap Blend Equities. NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while MOAT tracks Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NLR and 0.47% for MOAT.
MOAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs -0.15), 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 MOAT
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