PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NRES vs. CSNR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NRES vs. CSNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NRES achieves a 9.86% return, which is significantly lower than CSNR's 13.02% return.


NRES

1D
-0.31%
1M
-5.25%
YTD
9.86%
6M
9.71%
1Y
27.15%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CSNR

1D
-0.16%
1M
-5.69%
YTD
13.02%
6M
13.10%
1Y
32.75%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NRES vs. CSNR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between NRES and CSNR is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2025

0.92

The correlation between NRES and CSNR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

NRES vs. CSNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NRES
NRES Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
NRES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NRES Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
NRES Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
NRES Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
NRES Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

CSNR
CSNR Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
CSNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSNR Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
CSNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSNR Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

NRES vs. CSNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR). 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.


NRESCSNRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.32

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.80

3.83

-1.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.51

13.17

-3.66

NRES vs. CSNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NRES Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the CSNR Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NRES and CSNR, 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...

Drawdowns

NRES vs. CSNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NRES drawdown since its inception was -22.22%, which is greater than CSNR's maximum drawdown of -15.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NRES and CSNR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NRESCSNRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.22%

-15.33%

-6.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.74%

-8.59%

-1.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.74%

-8.59%

-1.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.26%

-1.95%

-3.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.86%

2.49%

+0.37%

Volatility

NRES vs. CSNR - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers RREEF Global Natural Resources ETF (NRES) and Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) have volatilities of 5.68% and 5.95%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NRESCSNRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.68%

5.95%

-0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.86%

14.39%

-0.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.48%

17.80%

-0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.14%

19.98%

-1.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.14%

19.98%

-1.84%

NRES vs. CSNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NRES has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than CSNR's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

NRES vs. CSNR - Dividend Comparison

NRES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.58%, more than CSNR's 2.13% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, NRES and CSNR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

CSNR has higher volatility (5.95%) compared to NRES (5.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NRES dropped -22.22% vs CSNR's -15.33%.

On 1-year performance, CSNR leads with 32.75% vs 27.15% for NRES. On fees, NRES is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, NRES has been the lower-risk option at 5.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CSNR has performed better with a 32.75% return vs 27.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NRES is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CSNR.

NRES has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 2.13% for CSNR.

They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Cohen & Steers. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for NRES and 0.50% for CSNR.

CSNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 1.56), 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 NRES and CSNR

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