NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NUCG.L (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear Technologies UCITS ETF) and GCLX.L (Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - NUCG.L is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the MarketVector Global Uranium and Nuclear Energy Infrastructure, while GCLX.L is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NUCG.L returned 42.28%/yr vs 7.96%/yr for GCLX.L. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NUCG.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GCLX.L.

Performance

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Uranium and Nuclear Technologies UCITS ETF (NUCG.L) and Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Acc (GCLX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

NUCG.L is traded in USD, while GCLX.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the GCLX.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUCG.L achieves a 13.00% return, which is significantly lower than GCLX.L's 35.73% return.

NUCG.L

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -5.19%
• YTD: 13.00%
• 6M: 3.75%
• 1Y: 52.97%
• 3Y*: 42.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GCLX.L

• 1D: -0.85%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 35.73%
• 6M: 37.43%
• 1Y: 86.88%
• 3Y*: 7.96%
• 5Y*: -4.56%
• 10Y*: —

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

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NUCG.L VanEck Uranium and Nuclear Technologies UCITS ETF	13.00%	56.08%	31.87%	19.75%
GCLX.L Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Acc	35.73%	42.47%	-26.64%	-18.88%

Correlation

The correlation between NUCG.L and GCLX.L is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2023	0.47

The correlation between NUCG.L and GCLX.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NUCG.L	GCLX.L
Energy	48.0%	13.6%
Industrials	41.2%	47.5%
Utilities	9.8%	16.1%
Technology	0.9%	6.8%
Basic Materials	-	3.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.9%
Financial Services	-	0.9%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUCG.L

NUCG.L Risk / Return Rank: 38
NUCG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
NUCG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
NUCG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 36
NUCG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
NUCG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

GCLX.L

GCLX.L Risk / Return Rank: 95
GCLX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
GCLX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
GCLX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 94
GCLX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
GCLX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear Technologies UCITS ETF (NUCG.L) and Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Acc (GCLX.L). 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.

	NUCG.L	GCLX.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	3.85	-2.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	4.54	-2.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.60	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	7.81	-5.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.70	25.87	-21.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUCG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is lower than the GCLX.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUCG.L and GCLX.L, 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

	NUCG.L	GCLX.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37	3.85	-2.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	-0.25	+1.23

Drawdowns

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUCG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.36%, smaller than the maximum GCLX.L drawdown of -71.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUCG.L and GCLX.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	NUCG.L	GCLX.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.36%	-71.94%	+36.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.65%	-11.06%	-15.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.36%	-53.30%	+17.94%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-69.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.31%	-31.80%	+18.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.20%	-44.61%	+35.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.65%	3.35%	+8.30%

Volatility

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Uranium and Nuclear Technologies UCITS ETF (NUCG.L) has a higher volatility of 12.21% compared to Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Acc (GCLX.L) at 9.10%. This indicates that NUCG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GCLX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NUCG.L	GCLX.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.21%	9.10%	+3.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.51%	15.84%	+11.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.88%	22.45%	+17.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.92%	28.04%	+8.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.92%	28.56%	+8.36%

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUCG.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than GCLX.L's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

NUCG.L vs. GCLX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither NUCG.L nor GCLX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NUCG.L and GCLX.L in my portfolio?

NUCG.L and GCLX.L have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NUCG.L or GCLX.L?

On fees, NUCG.L is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NUCG.L or GCLX.L?

NUCG.L is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCLX.L.

What is the main difference between NUCG.L and GCLX.L?

NUCG.L is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while GCLX.L is Energy Equities. NUCG.L tracks MarketVector Global Uranium and Nuclear Energy Infrastructure, while GCLX.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for NUCG.L and 0.60% for GCLX.L.