RCTR vs. CRAK

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RCTR (First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF) and CRAK (VanEck Oil Refiners ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - RCTR tracks the Bloomberg Nuclear Power Index while CRAK tracks the MVIS Global Oil Refiners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RCTR returned 9.71% vs 70.85% for CRAK. Their 0.17 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. RCTR charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for CRAK.

Performance

RCTR vs. CRAK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RCTR achieves a 0.61% return, which is significantly lower than CRAK's 47.28% return.

RCTR

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -2.79%
• 6M: -9.50%
• YTD: 0.61%
• 1Y: 9.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.30%

CRAK

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: 16.39%
• 6M: 31.77%
• YTD: 47.28%
• 1Y: 70.85%
• 3Y*: 23.11%
• 5Y*: 19.01%
• 10Y*: 14.65%
• ALL TIME*: 12.82%

*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)
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	$24.74M	$18.05M	$9.17M
RCTR First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF	$83.08K	$122.59K	$254.75K

RCTR vs. CRAK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RCTR First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF	0.61%	6.65%
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	47.28%	12.66%

Correlation

The correlation between RCTR and CRAK is 0.17, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2025	0.17

Return for Risk

RCTR vs. CRAK — Risk / Return Rank

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

RCTR

RCTR Risk / Return Rank: 18
RCTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
RCTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
RCTR Omega Ratio Rank: 17
RCTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
RCTR Martin Ratio Rank: 18

CRAK

CRAK Risk / Return Rank: 95
CRAK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
CRAK Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CRAK Omega Ratio Rank: 95
CRAK Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
CRAK Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

RCTR vs. CRAK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK). 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.

	RCTR	CRAK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	3.39	-3.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.60	4.31	-3.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.55	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.42	5.01	-4.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.00	16.54	-15.54

RCTR vs. CRAK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RCTR Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the CRAK Sharpe Ratio of 3.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RCTR and CRAK, 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

RCTR vs. CRAK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RCTR drawdown since its inception was -18.98%, smaller than the maximum CRAK drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RCTR and CRAK.

Drawdown Indicators

	RCTR	CRAK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.98%	-58.80%	+39.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.98%	-13.59%	-5.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-58.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.26%	-1.04%	-15.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.09%	-12.39%	+6.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.86%	4.11%	+3.75%

Volatility

RCTR vs. CRAK - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) has a higher volatility of 7.98% compared to VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) at 6.59%. This indicates that RCTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRAK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RCTR	CRAK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.98%	6.59%	+1.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.49%	16.11%	+4.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.82%	20.11%	+6.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.82%	20.75%	+6.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.82%	22.24%	+4.58%

RCTR vs. CRAK - Expense Ratio Comparison

RCTR has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than CRAK's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

RCTR vs. CRAK - Dividend Comparison

RCTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than CRAK's 1.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	1.37%	2.02%	5.60%	3.65%	3.08%	2.40%	2.64%	1.49%	2.42%	1.66%	3.42%	0.47%
RCTR First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF	0.64%	0.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RCTR and CRAK in my portfolio?

RCTR and CRAK have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RCTR or CRAK?

RCTR has higher volatility (7.98%) compared to CRAK (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RCTR dropped -18.98% vs CRAK's -58.80%.

Which ETF is better, RCTR or CRAK?

On 1-year performance, CRAK leads with 70.85% vs 9.71% for RCTR. On fees, CRAK is cheaper at 0.62% per year. On volatility, CRAK has been the lower-risk option at 6.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RCTR or CRAK?

Over the 1-year period, CRAK has performed better with a 70.85% return vs 9.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RCTR or CRAK?

CRAK is cheaper with a 0.62% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for RCTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RCTR or CRAK?

CRAK has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 0.64% for RCTR.

What is the main difference between RCTR and CRAK?

RCTR tracks Bloomberg Nuclear Power Index, while CRAK tracks MVIS Global Oil Refiners Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for RCTR and 0.62% for CRAK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CRAK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.39 vs 0.29), 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.