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

Performance

RCTR vs. KNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and FT Vest S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Target Income ETF (KNG). 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 lower than KNG's 8.70% return.


RCTR

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

KNG

1D
-0.22%
1M
-0.81%
6M
3.64%
YTD
8.70%
1Y
13.21%
3Y*
6.91%
5Y*
5.62%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$17.95M$15.66M$14.57M
$83.08K$122.59K$254.75K

RCTR vs. KNG - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RCTR and KNG is 0.13, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


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

0.13

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

0.13

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. KNG — 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

KNG
KNG Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
KNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
KNG Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
KNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
KNG Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
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. KNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) and FT Vest S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Target Income ETF (KNG). 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.


RCTRKNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.20

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.42

1.47

-1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.00

3.70

-2.70

RCTR vs. KNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RCTR Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the KNG Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RCTR and KNG, 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. KNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RCTR drawdown since its inception was -18.98%, smaller than the maximum KNG drawdown of -35.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RCTR and KNG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RCTRKNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.98%

-35.12%

+16.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.98%

-8.61%

-10.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.26%

-2.12%

-14.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.09%

-4.09%

-2.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.86%

3.42%

+4.44%

Volatility

RCTR vs. KNG - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF (RCTR) has a higher volatility of 7.98% compared to FT Vest S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Target Income ETF (KNG) at 4.58%. This indicates that RCTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RCTRKNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.98%

4.58%

+3.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.49%

8.36%

+12.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.82%

10.87%

+15.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.82%

13.65%

+13.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

26.82%

17.12%

+9.70%

RCTR vs. KNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RCTR has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KNG's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

RCTR vs. KNG - Dividend Comparison

RCTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than KNG's 8.27% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
KNG
FT Vest S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Target Income ETF
8.27%8.61%9.08%5.91%4.00%3.45%3.62%4.09%3.46%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions


RCTR and KNG have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RCTR has higher volatility (7.98%) compared to KNG (4.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RCTR dropped -18.98% vs KNG's -35.12%.

On 1-year performance, KNG leads with 13.21% vs 9.71% for RCTR. On fees, RCTR is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KNG has been the lower-risk option at 4.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, KNG has performed better with a 13.21% return vs 9.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RCTR is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for KNG.

KNG has the higher dividend yield at 8.27%, compared with 0.64% for RCTR.

RCTR is categorized as Energy Equities, while KNG is Dividend. RCTR tracks Bloomberg Nuclear Power Index, while KNG tracks Cboe S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Target Income Index Monthly Series. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for RCTR and 0.75% for KNG.

KNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 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 KNG

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