PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RCTR vs. ION
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RCTR vs. ION - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RCTR achieves a 0.61% return, which is significantly higher than ION's -7.96% return.


RCTR

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

ION

1D
-0.29%
1M
-7.01%
6M
-17.55%
YTD
-7.96%
1Y
56.19%
3Y*
9.85%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
5.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$76.11K$91.53K$254.87K
$83.08K$122.59K$254.75K

RCTR vs. ION - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RCTR and ION is 0.56, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2025

0.56

The correlation between RCTR and ION has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

RCTR vs. ION — Risk / Return Rank

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

RCTR
RCTR Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
RCTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RCTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
RCTR Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
RCTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
RCTR Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

ION
ION Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
ION Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ION Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
ION Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
ION Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
ION Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
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. ION - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION). 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.


RCTRIONDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.24

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.42

1.70

-1.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.00

4.67

-3.67

RCTR vs. ION - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RCTR Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the ION Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RCTR and ION, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

RCTR vs. ION - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RCTR drawdown since its inception was -18.98%, smaller than the maximum ION drawdown of -52.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RCTR and ION.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RCTRIONDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.98%

-52.08%

+33.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.98%

-33.66%

+14.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-42.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.26%

-30.57%

+14.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.09%

-23.76%

+17.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.86%

12.26%

-4.40%

Volatility

RCTR vs. ION - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) is 7.98%, while Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION) has a volatility of 9.49%. This indicates that RCTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ION based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RCTRIONDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.98%

9.49%

-1.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.49%

30.92%

-10.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.82%

39.63%

-12.81%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.82%

31.58%

-4.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.82%

31.58%

-4.76%

RCTR vs. ION - Expense Ratio Comparison

RCTR has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than ION's 0.58% expense ratio.


Dividends

RCTR vs. ION - Dividend Comparison

RCTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than ION's 1.61% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
ION
Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF
1.61%1.63%1.74%2.23%0.13%
RCTR
First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF
0.64%0.36%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RCTR and ION have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ION has higher volatility (9.49%) compared to RCTR (7.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RCTR dropped -18.98% vs ION's -52.08%.

On 1-year performance, ION leads with 56.19% vs 9.71% for RCTR. On fees, ION is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, RCTR has been the lower-risk option at 7.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ION has performed better with a 56.19% return vs 9.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ION is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for RCTR.

ION has the higher dividend yield at 1.61%, compared with 0.64% for RCTR.

RCTR is categorized as Energy Equities, while ION is Lithium & Battery Metals. RCTR tracks Bloomberg Nuclear Power Index, while ION tracks S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for RCTR and 0.58% for ION.

ION currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RCTR and ION

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