NLR vs. TAN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) and TAN (Invesco Solar ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - NLR tracks the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index while TAN tracks the MAC Global Solar Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, NLR returned 13.66%/yr vs 13.50%/yr for TAN. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NLR charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for TAN.

Performance

NLR vs. TAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NLR achieves a 6.14% return, which is significantly lower than TAN's 43.10% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with NLR having a 13.66% annualized return and TAN not far behind at 13.50%.

NLR

• 1D: -4.59%
• 1M: -8.11%
• YTD: 6.14%
• 6M: 1.51%
• 1Y: 36.84%
• 3Y*: 35.11%
• 5Y*: 21.94%
• 10Y*: 13.66%

TAN

• 1D: -2.74%
• 1M: 20.40%
• YTD: 43.10%
• 6M: 48.35%
• 1Y: 112.42%
• 3Y*: -0.64%
• 5Y*: -1.65%
• 10Y*: 13.50%

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

NLR vs. TAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	6.14%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.29%	13.63%	3.49%	0.20%	4.94%	8.25%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	43.10%	48.31%	-37.61%	-26.79%	-5.24%	-25.10%	233.96%	66.53%	-25.67%	54.38%

Correlation

The correlation between NLR and TAN is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.40
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2008	0.45

NLR vs. TAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NLR	TAN
Energy	46.0%	57.3%
Utilities	37.4%	22.1%
Industrials	15.1%	3.3%
Technology	1.5%	9.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	3.6%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

NLR vs. TAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

NLR

NLR Risk / Return Rank: 25
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 24
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 22

TAN

TAN Risk / Return Rank: 85
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 72
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

NLR vs. TAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). 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	TAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	3.05	-2.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	3.62	-2.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.44	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	8.30	-6.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.93	20.09	-17.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NLR vs. TAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NLR Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the TAN Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NLR and TAN, 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

	NLR	TAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88	3.05	-2.17
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	-0.04	+0.80
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.36	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.18	-0.12	+0.30

Drawdowns

NLR vs. TAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NLR drawdown since its inception was -65.05%, smaller than the maximum TAN drawdown of -95.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NLR and TAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	NLR	TAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.05%	-95.29%	+30.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.80%	-13.62%	-12.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.48%	-64.40%	+33.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.48%	-73.95%	+43.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.35%	-78.53%	+44.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.80%	-67.72%	+47.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.72%	-78.51%	+42.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.61%	5.62%	+6.99%

Volatility

NLR vs. TAN - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a higher volatility of 13.18% compared to Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) at 12.15%. This indicates that NLR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NLR	TAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.18%	12.15%	+1.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.83%	25.32%	+7.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.32%	37.29%	+5.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.24%	39.74%	-10.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.02%	37.98%	-13.96%

NLR vs. TAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

NLR has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than TAN's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

NLR vs. TAN - Dividend Comparison

NLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, while TAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	2.40%	2.55%	0.76%	4.54%	2.02%	1.99%	2.23%	2.21%	3.91%	4.86%	3.62%	3.30%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.50%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.09%	0.30%	0.69%	1.77%	5.04%	1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NLR and TAN in my portfolio?

NLR and TAN have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NLR or TAN?

NLR has higher volatility (13.18%) compared to TAN (12.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NLR dropped -65.05% vs TAN's -95.29%.

Which ETF is better, NLR or TAN?

On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 13.66% vs 13.50% for TAN. On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, TAN has been the lower-risk option at 12.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NLR or TAN?

Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 13.66% return vs 13.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NLR or TAN?

NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NLR or TAN?

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.00% for TAN.

What is the main difference between NLR and TAN?

NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NLR and 0.69% for TAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs 0.88), 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.