NLR vs. XLB
NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) and XLB (Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while XLB is a Materials fund tracking the Materials Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, NLR returned 10.66%/yr vs 9.64%/yr for XLB. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NLR charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for XLB.
Performance
NLR vs. XLB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NLR achieves a -15.40% return, which is significantly lower than XLB's 11.23% return. Over the past 10 years, NLR has outperformed XLB with an annualized return of 10.66%, while XLB has yielded a comparatively lower 9.64% annualized return.
NLR
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- -17.23%
- 6M
- -29.26%
- YTD
- -15.40%
- 1Y
- -8.06%
- 3Y*
- 23.46%
- 5Y*
- 17.81%
- 10Y*
- 10.66%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.20%
XLB
- 1D
- -0.99%
- 1M
- -3.07%
- 6M
- 3.62%
- YTD
- 11.23%
- 1Y
- 12.93%
- 3Y*
- 8.17%
- 5Y*
- 6.37%
- 10Y*
- 9.64%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.27%
NLR vs. XLB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -15.40% | 56.50% | 14.26% | 36.67% | 2.29% | 13.63% | 3.49% | 0.20% | 4.94% | 8.25% |
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF | 11.23% | 9.94% | 0.15% | 12.46% | -12.30% | 27.44% | 20.46% | 24.13% | -14.88% | 24.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between NLR and XLB is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2007 | 0.57 |
The correlation between NLR and XLB shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.57 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
NLR vs. XLB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NLR
XLB
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
Basic Materials
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Energy
NLR
XLB
-
Utilities
NLR
XLB
-
Industrials
NLR
XLB
Basic Materials
NLR
XLB
Technology
NLR
XLB
-
Communication Services
NLR
-
XLB
-
Consumer Cyclical
NLR
-
XLB
Consumer Defensive
NLR
-
XLB
-
Financial Services
NLR
-
XLB
-
Healthcare
NLR
-
XLB
-
Real Estate
NLR
-
XLB
-
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. XLB — Risk / Return Rank
NLR
XLB
NLR vs. XLB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB). 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 | XLB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.14 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.22 | 1.05 | -1.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.50 | 3.08 | -3.58 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NLR vs. XLB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NLR drawdown since its inception was -65.05%, which is greater than XLB's maximum drawdown of -59.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NLR and XLB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NLR | XLB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.05% | -59.83% | -5.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.61% | -12.38% | -24.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -36.61% | -23.17% | -13.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.61% | -24.72% | -11.89% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.61% | -37.27% | +0.66% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.08% | -5.93% | -30.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -35.67% | -10.81% | -24.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.20% | 4.20% | +12.00% |
Volatility
NLR vs. XLB - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a higher volatility of 9.51% compared to Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) at 4.95%. This indicates that NLR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NLR | XLB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.51% | 4.95% | +4.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 32.62% | 13.74% | +18.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.18% | 17.58% | +25.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.88% | 19.03% | +10.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.43% | 20.64% | +3.79% |
NLR vs. XLB - Expense Ratio Comparison
NLR has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than XLB's 0.13% expense ratio.
Dividends
NLR vs. XLB - Dividend Comparison
NLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.01%, more than XLB's 1.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 3.01% | 2.55% | 0.76% | 4.54% | 2.02% | 1.99% | 2.23% | 2.21% | 3.91% | 4.86% | 3.62% | 3.30% |
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF | 1.70% | 1.92% | 1.92% | 2.00% | 2.26% | 1.62% | 1.72% | 1.98% | 2.20% | 1.66% | 1.95% | 2.24% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NLR and XLB have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NLR has higher volatility (9.51%) compared to XLB (4.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NLR dropped -65.05% vs XLB's -59.83%.
On 10-year performance, NLR leads with 10.66% vs 9.64% for XLB. On fees, XLB is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, XLB has been the lower-risk option at 4.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, NLR has performed better with a 10.66% return vs 9.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLB is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 1.70% for XLB.
NLR is categorized as Uranium, while XLB is Materials. NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while XLB tracks Materials Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NLR and 0.13% for XLB.
XLB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.74 vs -0.19), 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 XLB
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