NULC vs. CCOR

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

NULC (Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF) and CCOR (Core Alternative ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. NULC is passively managed, while CCOR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, NULC returned 10.75%/yr vs -1.46%/yr for CCOR. Their 0.23 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. NULC charges 0.20%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for CCOR.

Performance

NULC vs. CCOR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) and Core Alternative ETF (CCOR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NULC achieves a 16.79% return, which is significantly higher than CCOR's 1.40% return.

NULC

• 1D: 1.94%
• 1M: 4.01%
• 6M: 14.56%
• YTD: 16.79%
• 1Y: 22.88%
• 3Y*: 20.15%
• 5Y*: 10.75%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.13%

CCOR

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: 1.50%
• 6M: -2.63%
• YTD: 1.40%
• 1Y: 0.01%
• 3Y*: -0.96%
• 5Y*: -1.46%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 1.81%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	$61.50K	$56.93K	$78.52K
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	$320.07K	$400.60K	$268.48K

NULC vs. CCOR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	16.79%	16.29%	18.71%	22.54%	-20.18%	25.69%	22.51%	6.17%
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	1.40%	3.52%	-5.70%	-11.92%	2.51%	9.90%	4.07%	2.79%

Correlation

The correlation between NULC and CCOR is -0.04, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.04
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.03
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2019	0.23

The correlation between NULC and CCOR shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.23 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NULC vs. CCOR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NULC	CCOR
Technology	40.7%	15.7%
Financial Services	12.4%	18.6%
Healthcare	9.9%	12.2%
Industrials	9.0%	9.4%
Consumer Cyclical	7.5%	9.1%
Communication Services	6.7%	7.8%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	6.9%
Energy	2.1%	6.4%
Utilities	2.0%	6.3%
Real Estate	2.0%	2.8%
Basic Materials	1.5%	4.9%

Return for Risk

NULC vs. CCOR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NULC

NULC Risk / Return Rank: 65
NULC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
NULC Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
NULC Omega Ratio Rank: 60
NULC Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
NULC Martin Ratio Rank: 73

CCOR

CCOR Risk / Return Rank: 10
CCOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
CCOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
CCOR Omega Ratio Rank: 9
CCOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
CCOR Martin Ratio Rank: 10

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NULC vs. CCOR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) and Core Alternative ETF (CCOR). 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.

	NULC	CCOR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	0.00	+1.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	0.06	+2.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.01	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.58	0.00	+2.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.27	0.00	+10.26

NULC vs. CCOR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NULC Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is higher than the CCOR Sharpe Ratio of 0.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NULC and CCOR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NULC vs. CCOR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NULC drawdown since its inception was -34.86%, which is greater than CCOR's maximum drawdown of -22.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NULC and CCOR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NULC	CCOR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.86%	-22.99%	-11.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.91%	-8.79%	-0.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.53%	-12.31%	-6.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.90%	-22.99%	-4.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-15.78%	+15.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.35%	-7.47%	+1.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.23%	4.19%	-1.96%

Volatility

NULC vs. CCOR - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) has a higher volatility of 3.98% compared to Core Alternative ETF (CCOR) at 3.00%. This indicates that NULC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCOR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NULC	CCOR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.98%	3.00%	+0.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.74%	6.47%	+4.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.63%	8.23%	+5.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.00%	11.19%	+5.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.89%	10.77%	+9.12%

NULC vs. CCOR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NULC has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CCOR's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

NULC vs. CCOR - Dividend Comparison

NULC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.71%, more than CCOR's 0.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	0.98%	1.07%	1.18%	1.21%	1.11%	1.02%	1.50%	0.73%	1.53%	0.89%
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	8.71%	10.17%	1.86%	1.32%	2.37%	6.14%	4.07%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NULC and CCOR in my portfolio?

NULC and CCOR have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NULC or CCOR?

NULC has higher volatility (3.98%) compared to CCOR (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NULC dropped -34.86% vs CCOR's -22.99%.

Which ETF is better, NULC or CCOR?

On 5-year performance, NULC leads with 10.75% vs -1.46% for CCOR. On fees, NULC is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CCOR has been the lower-risk option at 3.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NULC or CCOR?

Over the 5-year period, NULC has performed better with a 10.75% return vs -1.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NULC or CCOR?

NULC is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for CCOR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NULC or CCOR?

NULC has the higher dividend yield at 8.71%, compared with 0.98% for CCOR.

What is the main difference between NULC and CCOR?

They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Core Alternative. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for NULC and 1.09% for CCOR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NULC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 0.00), 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.