NUKZ vs. GLTR

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

NUKZ (Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF) and GLTR (Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NUKZ is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index, while GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, NUKZ returned 31.62% vs 45.14% for GLTR. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NUKZ charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.

Performance

NUKZ vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUKZ achieves a 7.72% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's -3.01% return.

NUKZ

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -6.54%
• YTD: 7.72%
• 6M: 3.81%
• 1Y: 31.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GLTR

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: -11.67%
• YTD: -3.01%
• 6M: 6.38%
• 1Y: 45.14%
• 3Y*: 30.24%
• 5Y*: 14.39%
• 10Y*: 12.31%

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

NUKZ vs. GLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	7.72%	56.57%	60.11%
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	-3.01%	87.25%	25.41%

Correlation

The correlation between NUKZ and GLTR is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2024	0.32

Return for Risk

NUKZ vs. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 34
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 30
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 35

GLTR

GLTR Risk / Return Rank: 34
GLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
GLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 43
GLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
GLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) and Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). 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	GLTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	1.19	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	1.52	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.25	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	1.51	+0.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.79	3.41	+1.37
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. GLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUKZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is comparable to the GLTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUKZ and GLTR, 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	GLTR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.05	1.19	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.60	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	0.31	+1.33

Drawdowns

NUKZ vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUKZ drawdown since its inception was -33.03%, smaller than the maximum GLTR drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUKZ and GLTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NUKZ	GLTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.03%	-55.70%	+22.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.51%	-30.10%	+13.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.10%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-30.10%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.27%	-30.08%	+19.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.02%	-28.83%	+22.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.62%	13.25%	-6.63%

Volatility

NUKZ vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison

Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) has a higher volatility of 10.20% compared to Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) at 9.50%. This indicates that NUKZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NUKZ	GLTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.20%	9.50%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.61%	35.83%	-13.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.26%	38.04%	-7.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.82%	23.75%	+9.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.82%	20.57%	+12.25%

NUKZ vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUKZ has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

NUKZ vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison

NUKZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, while GLTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GLTR Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.85%	0.91%	0.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NUKZ and GLTR in my portfolio?

NUKZ and GLTR have a correlation of 0.34, 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 GLTR?

NUKZ has higher volatility (10.20%) compared to GLTR (9.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUKZ dropped -33.03% vs GLTR's -55.70%.

Which ETF is better, NUKZ or GLTR?

On 1-year performance, GLTR leads with 45.14% vs 31.62% for NUKZ. On fees, GLTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 9.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NUKZ or GLTR?

Over the 1-year period, GLTR has performed better with a 45.14% return vs 31.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NUKZ or GLTR?

GLTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

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

NUKZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.00% for GLTR.

What is the main difference between NUKZ and GLTR?

NUKZ is categorized as Energy Equities, while GLTR is Precious Metals. NUKZ tracks Range Nuclear Renaissance Index, while GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for NUKZ and 0.60% for GLTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 1.05), 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.