PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NLR vs. XLF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NLR vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NLR achieves a -0.79% return, which is significantly higher than XLF's -4.62% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with NLR having a 12.72% annualized return and XLF not far ahead at 12.79%.


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%

XLF

1D
-0.63%
1M
1.42%
YTD
-4.62%
6M
-1.98%
1Y
2.91%
3Y*
18.06%
5Y*
8.47%
10Y*
12.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NLR vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
-0.79%56.50%14.26%36.67%2.29%13.63%3.49%0.20%4.94%8.25%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
-4.62%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between NLR and XLF is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.34

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2007

0.49

The correlation between NLR and XLF shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NLR vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NLR
XLF

Energy

46.0%

-

Utilities

37.4%

-

Industrials

15.1%
0.2%

Technology

1.5%
1.8%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

98.0%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Energy

NLR
46.0%
XLF

-

Utilities

NLR
37.4%
XLF

-

Industrials

NLR
15.1%
XLF
0.2%

Technology

NLR
1.5%
XLF
1.8%

Basic Materials

NLR

-

XLF

-

Communication Services

NLR

-

XLF

-

Consumer Cyclical

NLR

-

XLF

-

Consumer Defensive

NLR

-

XLF

-

Financial Services

NLR

-

XLF
98.0%

Healthcare

NLR

-

XLF

-

Real Estate

NLR

-

XLF

-

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. XLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
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. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.


NLRXLFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.05

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.04

0.20

+0.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.08

0.51

+1.57

NLR vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NLR Sharpe Ratio is 0.63, which is higher than the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NLR and XLF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NLRXLFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.63

0.20

+0.43

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

0.46

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.58

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.21

-0.04

Drawdowns

NLR vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NLR drawdown since its inception was -65.05%, smaller than the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NLR and XLF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NLRXLFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-65.05%

-82.69%

+17.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.80%

-14.79%

-11.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.48%

-15.54%

-14.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.48%

-25.81%

-4.67%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.35%

-42.86%

+8.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-25.03%

-7.38%

-17.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-35.71%

-20.02%

-15.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

12.87%

5.71%

+7.16%

Volatility

NLR vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a higher volatility of 13.36% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 4.20%. This indicates that NLR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NLRXLFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.36%

4.20%

+9.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

33.24%

11.18%

+22.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

42.96%

14.61%

+28.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.43%

18.66%

+10.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.14%

22.18%

+1.96%

NLR vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

NLR has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than XLF's 0.08% expense ratio.


Dividends

NLR vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

NLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.57%, more than XLF's 1.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.52%1.31%1.42%1.71%2.04%1.63%2.03%1.87%2.08%1.48%21.10%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


NLR and XLF have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NLR has higher volatility (13.36%) compared to XLF (4.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NLR dropped -65.05% vs XLF's -82.69%.

On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 12.79% vs 12.72% for NLR. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 12.79% return vs 12.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.57%, compared with 1.52% for XLF.

NLR is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while XLF is Financials Equities. NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NLR and 0.08% for XLF.

NLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 vs 0.20), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NLR and XLF

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