PGJ vs. URA
PGJ (Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PGJ is a China Equities fund tracking the Halter USX China Index, while URA is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PGJ returned 0.64%/yr vs 17.81%/yr for URA. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PGJ charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.
Performance
PGJ vs. URA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PGJ achieves a -8.75% return, which is significantly lower than URA's 25.02% return. Over the past 10 years, PGJ has underperformed URA with an annualized return of 0.64%, while URA has yielded a comparatively higher 17.81% annualized return.
PGJ
- 1D
- 1.98%
- 1M
- -1.05%
- YTD
- -8.75%
- 6M
- -12.02%
- 1Y
- -1.79%
- 3Y*
- 3.86%
- 5Y*
- -13.04%
- 10Y*
- 0.64%
URA
- 1D
- 5.70%
- 1M
- -4.33%
- YTD
- 25.02%
- 6M
- 23.66%
- 1Y
- 75.62%
- 3Y*
- 42.00%
- 5Y*
- 23.53%
- 10Y*
- 17.81%
PGJ vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | -8.75% | 13.66% | 5.91% | -2.38% | -24.50% | -42.87% | 54.24% | 32.18% | -29.51% | 60.27% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 25.02% | 67.18% | -0.58% | 46.25% | -11.32% | 57.57% | 41.33% | -3.54% | -22.11% | 19.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between PGJ and URA is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2010 | 0.44 |
PGJ vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PGJ
URA
Consumer Cyclical
-
Technology
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
Healthcare
-
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
PGJ
URA
-
Technology
PGJ
URA
Communication Services
PGJ
URA
-
Consumer Defensive
PGJ
URA
-
Industrials
PGJ
URA
Financial Services
PGJ
URA
-
Real Estate
PGJ
URA
-
Energy
PGJ
URA
Healthcare
PGJ
URA
-
Basic Materials
PGJ
-
URA
Utilities
PGJ
-
URA
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PGJ vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank
PGJ
URA
PGJ vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). 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.
| PGJ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.07 | 1.53 | -1.60 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.07 | 2.16 | -2.09 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.25 | -0.24 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 2.63 | -2.68 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.08 | 5.61 | -5.69 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PGJ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.07 | 1.53 | -1.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.30 | 0.54 | -0.84 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.02 | 0.47 | -0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | -0.04 | +0.16 |
Drawdowns
PGJ vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PGJ drawdown since its inception was -78.37%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGJ and URA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PGJ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.37% | -93.54% | +15.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.69% | -28.43% | +2.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.82% | -37.81% | +6.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -70.00% | -37.90% | -32.10% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -78.37% | -61.45% | -16.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -65.21% | -39.38% | -25.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.73% | -75.02% | +43.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.32% | 13.35% | -0.03% |
Volatility
PGJ vs. URA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is 8.19%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 14.99%. This indicates that PGJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PGJ | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.19% | 14.99% | -6.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.14% | 37.90% | -20.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.35% | 49.84% | -25.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.74% | 43.55% | +0.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.70% | 37.69% | -0.99% |
PGJ vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison
PGJ has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
PGJ vs. URA - Dividend Comparison
PGJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.47%, less than URA's 3.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PGJ Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF | 3.47% | 3.38% | 4.70% | 2.50% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 0.17% | 0.31% | 2.05% | 1.94% | 0.37% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 3.90% | 4.88% | 2.86% | 6.07% | 0.76% | 5.84% | 1.69% | 1.66% | 0.44% | 2.03% | 7.28% | 1.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PGJ and URA have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
URA has higher volatility (14.99%) compared to PGJ (8.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGJ dropped -78.37% vs URA's -93.54%.
On 10-year performance, URA leads with 17.81% vs 0.64% for PGJ. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, PGJ has been the lower-risk option at 8.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, URA has performed better with a 17.81% return vs 0.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
URA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for PGJ.
URA has the higher dividend yield at 3.90%, compared with 3.47% for PGJ.
PGJ is categorized as China Equities, while URA is Commodity Producers Equities. PGJ tracks Halter USX China Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for PGJ and 0.69% for URA.
URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs -0.07), 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.
Find the right allocation for PGJ and URA
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer