NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO
NNRG.NEO (Ninepoint Energy ETF) and HURA.TO (Global X Uranium Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NNRG.NEO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index, while HURA.TO is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NNRG.NEO returned 34.11%/yr vs 24.61%/yr for HURA.TO. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NNRG.NEO charges 1.79%/yr vs 0.98%/yr for HURA.TO.
Performance
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NNRG.NEO achieves a 47.23% return, which is significantly higher than HURA.TO's 13.02% return.
NNRG.NEO
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- -0.66%
- YTD
- 47.23%
- 6M
- 39.75%
- 1Y
- 71.20%
- 3Y*
- 26.98%
- 5Y*
- 34.11%
- 10Y*
- —
HURA.TO
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- -4.87%
- YTD
- 13.02%
- 6M
- 0.16%
- 1Y
- 56.49%
- 3Y*
- 35.77%
- 5Y*
- 24.61%
- 10Y*
- —
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF | 47.23% | 19.14% | 13.26% | -4.21% | 66.18% | 55.91% |
HURA.TO Global X Uranium Index ETF | 13.02% | 43.18% | 3.05% | 61.03% | -4.56% | 22.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between NNRG.NEO and HURA.TO is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2021 | 0.31 |
The correlation between NNRG.NEO and HURA.TO shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.31 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
NNRG.NEO
HURA.TO
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
Energy
NNRG.NEO
HURA.TO
Basic Materials
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
Communication Services
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Consumer Cyclical
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Consumer Defensive
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Financial Services
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Healthcare
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Industrials
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
Real Estate
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Technology
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
-
Utilities
NNRG.NEO
-
HURA.TO
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
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO — Risk / Return Rank
NNRG.NEO
HURA.TO
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and Global X Uranium Index ETF (HURA.TO). 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.
| NNRG.NEO | HURA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.21 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.60 | 1.85 | +4.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.91 | 3.70 | +10.20 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NNRG.NEO | HURA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.92 | 1.20 | +1.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.99 | 0.62 | +0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.08 | 0.75 | +0.32 |
Drawdowns
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown since its inception was -35.78%, smaller than the maximum HURA.TO drawdown of -43.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NNRG.NEO and HURA.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NNRG.NEO | HURA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.78% | -43.51% | +7.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.84% | -30.61% | +19.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.52% | -42.97% | +19.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.78% | -42.97% | +7.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.63% | -21.49% | +17.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.58% | -14.48% | +4.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.14% | 15.31% | -10.17% |
Volatility
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) is 10.30%, while Global X Uranium Index ETF (HURA.TO) has a volatility of 13.83%. This indicates that NNRG.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HURA.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NNRG.NEO | HURA.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.30% | 13.83% | -3.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.65% | 33.08% | -12.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.55% | 47.47% | -22.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.60% | 40.19% | -5.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.55% | 38.82% | -4.27% |
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
NNRG.NEO has a 1.79% expense ratio, which is higher than HURA.TO's 0.98% expense ratio.
Dividends
NNRG.NEO vs. HURA.TO - Dividend Comparison
NNRG.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, more than HURA.TO's 0.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HURA.TO Global X Uranium Index ETF | 0.08% | 0.09% | 0.75% | 1.03% | 1.46% | 1.26% | 0.63% | 0.82% |
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF | 0.51% | 0.37% | 0.39% | 0.38% | 9.08% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NNRG.NEO and HURA.TO have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HURA.TO is cheaper at 0.98% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HURA.TO is cheaper with a 0.98% expense ratio, compared with 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.
NNRG.NEO is categorized as Energy Equities, while HURA.TO is Commodity Producers Equities. NNRG.NEO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index, while HURA.TO tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Ninepoint and Global X. Their fees differ too: 1.79% for NNRG.NEO and 0.98% for HURA.TO.
Find the right allocation for NNRG.NEO and HURA.TO
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