SMHC vs. NLR
SMHC (VanEck China Semiconductor ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMHC is a China Equities fund tracking the MarketVector China Semiconductor 25 Index, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SMHC charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.
Performance
SMHC vs. NLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
SMHC
- 1D
- -6.17%
- 1M
- —
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NLR
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- -17.91%
- 6M
- -29.85%
- YTD
- -16.10%
- 1Y
- -8.82%
- 3Y*
- 22.80%
- 5Y*
- 17.39%
- 10Y*
- 10.66%
SMHC vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
SMHC VanEck China Semiconductor ETF | -15.04% |
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | -14.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMHC and NLR is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2026 | 0.36 |
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
SMHC vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank
SMHC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NLR
SMHC vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck China Semiconductor ETF (SMHC) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). 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.
| SMHC | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.01 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | -0.21 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | -0.47 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SMHC vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMHC drawdown since its inception was -24.16%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMHC and NLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMHC | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.16% | -65.05% | +40.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -36.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -36.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -36.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.16% | -36.61% | +12.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.02% | -35.67% | +26.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 16.04% | — |
Volatility
SMHC vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMHC | NLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 9.40% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 32.61% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 80.83% | 43.12% | +37.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 80.83% | 29.89% | +50.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 80.83% | 24.42% | +56.41% |
SMHC vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMHC has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMHC vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison
SMHC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.04%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | 3.04% | 2.55% | 0.76% | 4.54% | 2.02% | 1.99% | 2.23% | 2.21% | 3.91% | 4.86% | 3.62% | 3.30% |
SMHC VanEck China Semiconductor ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMHC and NLR have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NLR is cheaper at 0.56% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NLR is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SMHC.
NLR has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 0.00% for SMHC.
SMHC is categorized as China Equities, while NLR is Uranium. SMHC tracks MarketVector China Semiconductor 25 Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for SMHC and 0.56% for NLR.
Find the right allocation for SMHC and NLR
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