NURE vs. BLDG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NURE (Nuveen Short-Term REIT ETF) and BLDG (Cambria Global Real Estate ETF) are both REIT funds. NURE is passively managed, while BLDG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, NURE returned 2.02%/yr vs 2.40%/yr for BLDG. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NURE charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for BLDG.

Performance

NURE vs. BLDG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen Short-Term REIT ETF (NURE) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NURE achieves a 13.59% return, which is significantly higher than BLDG's 6.82% return.

NURE

• 1D: 2.34%
• 1M: 5.22%
• YTD: 13.59%
• 6M: 16.03%
• 1Y: 10.17%
• 3Y*: 5.79%
• 5Y*: 2.02%
• 10Y*: —

BLDG

• 1D: 0.82%
• 1M: 0.01%
• YTD: 6.82%
• 6M: 6.29%
• 1Y: 11.06%
• 3Y*: 9.14%
• 5Y*: 2.40%
• 10Y*: —

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

NURE vs. BLDG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
NURE Nuveen Short-Term REIT ETF	13.59%	-7.51%	6.65%	13.09%	-28.48%	53.41%	23.34%
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	6.82%	4.26%	8.18%	1.76%	-14.66%	22.47%	15.37%

Correlation

The correlation between NURE and BLDG is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2020	0.81

The correlation between NURE and BLDG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

NURE vs. BLDG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NURE	BLDG
Real Estate	100.0%	98.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.4%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NURE vs. BLDG — Risk / Return Rank

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

NURE

NURE Risk / Return Rank: 21
NURE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
NURE Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
NURE Omega Ratio Rank: 19
NURE Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
NURE Martin Ratio Rank: 20

BLDG

BLDG Risk / Return Rank: 27
BLDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
BLDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
BLDG Omega Ratio Rank: 26
BLDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
BLDG Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

NURE vs. BLDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Short-Term REIT ETF (NURE) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). 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.

	NURE	BLDG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.64	1.00	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.03	1.45	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.17	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.12	1.10	+0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.32	3.88	-1.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NURE vs. BLDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NURE Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is lower than the BLDG Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NURE and BLDG, 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

	NURE	BLDG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64	1.00	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10	0.16	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.46	-0.18

Drawdowns

NURE vs. BLDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NURE drawdown since its inception was -46.05%, which is greater than BLDG's maximum drawdown of -27.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NURE and BLDG.

Drawdown Indicators

	NURE	BLDG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.05%	-27.25%	-18.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.13%	-10.08%	+0.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.03%	-18.57%	-2.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.98%	-27.25%	-8.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.45%	-1.96%	-8.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.30%	-9.22%	-3.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.39%	2.86%	+1.53%

Volatility

NURE vs. BLDG - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen Short-Term REIT ETF (NURE) has a higher volatility of 4.58% compared to Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) at 3.58%. This indicates that NURE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLDG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NURE	BLDG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.58%	3.58%	+1.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.65%	8.26%	+3.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.95%	11.09%	+4.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.67%	15.27%	+4.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.81%	15.54%	+6.27%

NURE vs. BLDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

NURE has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BLDG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

NURE vs. BLDG - Dividend Comparison

NURE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.38%, less than BLDG's 5.68% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	5.68%	7.46%	7.97%	4.99%	3.99%	10.40%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NURE Nuveen Short-Term REIT ETF	4.38%	4.56%	3.51%	3.73%	2.80%	1.34%	3.41%	3.28%	4.11%	3.86%	0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NURE and BLDG in my portfolio?

NURE and BLDG have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NURE or BLDG?

NURE has higher volatility (4.58%) compared to BLDG (3.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NURE dropped -46.05% vs BLDG's -27.25%.

Which ETF is better, NURE or BLDG?

On 5-year performance, BLDG leads with 2.40% vs 2.02% for NURE. On fees, NURE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BLDG has been the lower-risk option at 3.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NURE or BLDG?

Over the 5-year period, BLDG has performed better with a 2.40% return vs 2.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NURE or BLDG?

NURE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BLDG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NURE or BLDG?

BLDG has the higher dividend yield at 5.68%, compared with 4.38% for NURE.

What is the main difference between NURE and BLDG?

They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for NURE and 0.59% for BLDG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.00 vs 0.64), 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.