NVIR vs. FTWO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NVIR (Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF) and FTWO (Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. NVIR is actively managed, while FTWO is passively managed. Over the past year, NVIR returned 34.67% vs 30.91% for FTWO. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NVIR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FTWO.

Performance

NVIR vs. FTWO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF (NVIR) and Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NVIR achieves a 22.17% return, which is significantly higher than FTWO's 10.90% return.

NVIR

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -1.59%
• YTD: 22.17%
• 6M: 19.29%
• 1Y: 34.67%
• 3Y*: 19.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FTWO

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -1.13%
• YTD: 10.90%
• 6M: 13.58%
• 1Y: 30.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NVIR vs. FTWO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NVIR Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF	22.17%	9.84%	17.53%	-4.41%
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF	10.90%	43.06%	14.97%	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between NVIR and FTWO is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 1, 2023	0.62

The correlation between NVIR and FTWO shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.62 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NVIR vs. FTWO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NVIR	FTWO
Energy	78.9%	29.1%
Industrials	11.1%	32.2%
Utilities	3.1%	11.7%
Technology	2.6%	-
Basic Materials	1.6%	25.9%
Healthcare	1.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	1.2%
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

NVIR vs. FTWO — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVIR

NVIR Risk / Return Rank: 70
NVIR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
NVIR Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
NVIR Omega Ratio Rank: 62
NVIR Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
NVIR Martin Ratio Rank: 75

FTWO

FTWO Risk / Return Rank: 49
FTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
FTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 46
FTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

NVIR vs. FTWO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF (NVIR) and Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO). 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.

	NVIR	FTWO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	1.72	+0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.88	2.33	+0.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.29	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.95	2.69	+2.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.32	7.23	+7.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NVIR vs. FTWO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVIR Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the FTWO Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVIR and FTWO, 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

	NVIR	FTWO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.18	1.72	+0.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.90	1.31	-0.41

Drawdowns

NVIR vs. FTWO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVIR drawdown since its inception was -22.47%, which is greater than FTWO's maximum drawdown of -18.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVIR and FTWO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NVIR	FTWO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.47%	-18.17%	-4.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.04%	-11.54%	+4.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.47%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.08%	-9.19%	+6.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.58%	-3.43%	-1.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.43%	4.29%	-1.86%

Volatility

NVIR vs. FTWO - Volatility Comparison

Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF (NVIR) and Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) have volatilities of 5.78% and 5.79%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NVIR	FTWO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.78%	5.79%	-0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.26%	14.59%	-2.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.05%	18.09%	-2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.24%	19.23%	+0.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.24%	19.23%	+0.01%

NVIR vs. FTWO - Expense Ratio Comparison

NVIR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FTWO's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

NVIR vs. FTWO - Dividend Comparison

NVIR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.75%, less than FTWO's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF	1.01%	1.02%	1.23%	0.59%
NVIR Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF	0.75%	0.92%	1.50%	1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NVIR and FTWO in my portfolio?

NVIR and FTWO have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NVIR or FTWO?

FTWO has higher volatility (5.79%) compared to NVIR (5.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVIR dropped -22.47% vs FTWO's -18.17%.

Which ETF is better, NVIR or FTWO?

On 1-year performance, NVIR leads with 34.67% vs 30.91% for FTWO. On fees, FTWO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NVIR or FTWO?

Over the 1-year period, NVIR has performed better with a 34.67% return vs 30.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NVIR or FTWO?

FTWO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NVIR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NVIR or FTWO?

FTWO has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.75% for NVIR.

What is the main difference between NVIR and FTWO?

They also come from different issuers: Horizon and Strive. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for NVIR and 0.49% for FTWO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NVIR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.72), 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.