NUKZ vs. CEFS

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS).

NUKZ and CEFS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. NUKZ is a passively managed fund by Exchange Traded Concepts that tracks the performance of the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. It was launched on Jan 23, 2024. CEFS is an actively managed fund by Exchange Traded Concepts. It was launched on Mar 21, 2017.

Performance

NUKZ vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

NUKZ vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	3.57%	56.57%	62.98%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	-0.33%	16.67%	22.32%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUKZ achieves a 3.57% return, which is significantly higher than CEFS's -0.33% return.

NUKZ

• 1D: 3.64%
• 1M: -10.35%
• YTD: 3.57%
• 6M: 2.03%
• 1Y: 74.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CEFS

• 1D: 2.04%
• 1M: -2.99%
• YTD: -0.33%
• 6M: 3.31%
• 1Y: 14.56%
• 3Y*: 17.06%
• 5Y*: 11.58%
• 10Y*: —

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

NUKZ vs. CEFS - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUKZ has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFS's 3.80% expense ratio.

CEFS

Saba Closed-End Funds ETF

NUKZ

Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF

Return for Risk

NUKZ vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 94
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 91
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 91

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 66
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 70
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.35	1.11	+1.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	1.54	+1.49
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.25	+0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.34	1.43	+2.91
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.46	6.94	+4.52
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. CEFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUKZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.35, which is higher than the CEFS Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUKZ and CEFS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NUKZ	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.35	1.11	+1.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.90	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.73	0.70	+1.04

Correlation

The correlation between NUKZ and CEFS is 0.48, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

NUKZ vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison

NUKZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than CEFS's 8.01% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.88%	0.91%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	8.01%	7.84%	8.79%	9.20%	11.32%	10.73%	8.61%	8.10%	10.43%	5.02%

Drawdowns

NUKZ vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUKZ drawdown since its inception was -33.03%, smaller than the maximum CEFS drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUKZ and CEFS.

Drawdown Indicators

	NUKZ	CEFS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.03%	-38.99%	+5.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.51%	-9.80%	-6.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.55%	-3.75%	-7.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.09%	-3.73%	-2.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.25%	2.02%	+4.23%

Volatility

NUKZ vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison

Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) has a higher volatility of 10.20% compared to Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) at 4.75%. This indicates that NUKZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NUKZ	CEFS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.20%	4.75%	+5.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.54%	7.46%	+14.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.75%	13.15%	+18.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.60%	12.99%	+19.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.60%	15.38%	+17.22%