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 12.50%/yr vs 14.10%/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 -5.48% return, which is significantly lower than MOAT's -1.35% return. Over the past 10 years, NLR has underperformed MOAT with an annualized return of 12.50%, while MOAT has yielded a comparatively higher 14.10% annualized return.
NLR
- 1D
- -1.72%
- 1M
- -12.79%
- YTD
- -5.48%
- 6M
- -8.75%
- 1Y
- 10.82%
- 3Y*
- 29.67%
- 5Y*
- 19.89%
- 10Y*
- 12.50%
MOAT
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.06%
- YTD
- -1.35%
- 6M
- -2.43%
- 1Y
- 12.09%
- 3Y*
- 10.80%
- 5Y*
- 7.84%
- 10Y*
- 14.10%
NLR vs. MOAT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -5.48% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
MOAT VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF | -1.35% | 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 0.31, 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 | 0.49 |
The correlation between NLR and MOAT shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (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
Technology
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
NLR
MOAT
-
Utilities
NLR
MOAT
-
Industrials
NLR
MOAT
Technology
NLR
MOAT
Basic Materials
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 | -0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 1.15 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.37 | 0.98 | -0.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.77 | 2.92 | -2.14 |
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 | -29.72% | -12.43% | -17.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.48% | -21.44% | -9.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.48% | -23.96% | -6.52% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.35% | -33.31% | -1.04% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.58% | -5.12% | -23.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.68% | -3.83% | -31.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.05% | 4.15% | +9.90% |
Volatility
NLR vs. MOAT - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a higher volatility of 13.33% compared to VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) at 4.72%. 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 | 13.33% | 4.72% | +8.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 32.82% | 10.24% | +22.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 42.83% | 13.96% | +28.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.66% | 18.24% | +11.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.27% | 18.65% | +5.62% |
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 2.70%, more than MOAT's 1.37% 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 | 2.70% | 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 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (13.33%) compared to MOAT (4.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NLR dropped -65.05% vs MOAT's -33.31%.
On 10-year performance, MOAT leads with 14.10% vs 12.50% for NLR. On fees, MOAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, MOAT has been the lower-risk option at 4.72%. 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 14.10% return vs 12.50%. 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 2.70%, compared with 1.37% 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 (0.87 vs 0.25), 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