NUKZ vs. AMOM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NUKZ (Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF) and AMOM (QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NUKZ is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index, while AMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. NUKZ is passively managed, while AMOM is actively managed. Over the past year, NUKZ returned 41.42% vs 43.17% for AMOM. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NUKZ charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for AMOM.

Performance

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUKZ achieves a 13.31% return, which is significantly lower than AMOM's 27.93% return.

NUKZ

• 1D: -2.59%
• 1M: -0.90%
• YTD: 13.31%
• 6M: 10.66%
• 1Y: 41.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMOM

• 1D: 1.02%
• 1M: 12.16%
• YTD: 27.93%
• 6M: 28.91%
• 1Y: 43.17%
• 3Y*: 28.22%
• 5Y*: 12.53%
• 10Y*: —

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

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	13.31%	56.57%	62.98%
AMOM QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF	27.93%	7.69%	26.74%

Correlation

The correlation between NUKZ and AMOM is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.70

The correlation between NUKZ and AMOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NUKZ	AMOM
Industrials	45.9%	14.5%
Utilities	35.8%	3.8%
Energy	12.9%	1.2%
Basic Materials	4.0%	2.7%
Technology	1.4%	41.9%
Communication Services	-	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	5.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.0%
Financial Services	-	6.2%
Healthcare	-	7.7%
Real Estate	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

NUKZ vs. AMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 40
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 34
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 39

AMOM

AMOM Risk / Return Rank: 60
AMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
AMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
AMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 56
AMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
AMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM). 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.

	NUKZ	AMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	2.01	-0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.02	2.66	-0.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.35	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.52	3.31	-0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.34	11.88	-5.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUKZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is lower than the AMOM Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUKZ and AMOM, 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

	NUKZ	AMOM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.40	2.01	-0.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.75	0.75	+1.00

Drawdowns

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUKZ drawdown since its inception was -33.03%, smaller than the maximum AMOM drawdown of -39.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUKZ and AMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	NUKZ	AMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.03%	-39.68%	+6.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.51%	-13.10%	-3.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.26%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.61%	0.00%	-5.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.01%	-10.81%	+4.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.55%	3.64%	+2.91%

Volatility

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Volatility Comparison

Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) has a higher volatility of 10.30% compared to QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF (AMOM) at 7.11%. This indicates that NUKZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NUKZ	AMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.30%	7.11%	+3.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.05%	16.71%	+5.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.74%	21.58%	+8.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.70%	23.74%	+8.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.70%	24.95%	+7.75%

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUKZ has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than AMOM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

NUKZ vs. AMOM - Dividend Comparison

NUKZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, more than AMOM's 0.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AMOM QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap Momentum ETF	0.07%	0.09%	0.00%	0.47%	0.72%	0.74%	24.31%	5.51%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.80%	0.91%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NUKZ and AMOM in my portfolio?

NUKZ and AMOM have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NUKZ or AMOM?

NUKZ has higher volatility (10.30%) compared to AMOM (7.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUKZ dropped -33.03% vs AMOM's -39.68%.

Which ETF is better, NUKZ or AMOM?

On 1-year performance, AMOM leads with 43.17% vs 41.42% for NUKZ. On fees, AMOM is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, AMOM has been the lower-risk option at 7.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NUKZ or AMOM?

Over the 1-year period, AMOM has performed better with a 43.17% return vs 41.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NUKZ or AMOM?

AMOM is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NUKZ or AMOM?

NUKZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.80%, compared with 0.07% for AMOM.

What is the main difference between NUKZ and AMOM?

NUKZ is categorized as Energy Equities, while AMOM is Momentum. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for NUKZ and 0.75% for AMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AMOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.40), 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.