SMOT vs. NLR

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

SMOT (VanEck Morningstar SMID Moat ETF) and NLR (VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMOT is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Small-Mid Cap Moat Focus, while NLR is a Uranium fund tracking the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SMOT returned 9.86%/yr vs 22.80%/yr for NLR. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SMOT charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for NLR.

Performance

SMOT vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar SMID Moat ETF (SMOT) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMOT achieves a 9.36% return, which is significantly higher than NLR's -16.10% return.

SMOT

• 1D: 1.14%
• 1M: 2.12%
• 6M: 4.93%
• YTD: 9.36%
• 1Y: 14.00%
• 3Y*: 9.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NLR

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: -16.41%
• 6M: -29.85%
• YTD: -16.10%
• 1Y: -7.56%
• 3Y*: 22.80%
• 5Y*: 17.39%
• 10Y*: 10.66%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SMOT vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SMOT VanEck Morningstar SMID Moat ETF	9.36%	6.46%	10.71%	17.31%	3.85%
NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF	-16.10%	56.50%	14.26%	36.67%	2.93%

Correlation

The correlation between SMOT and NLR is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2022	0.43

The correlation between SMOT and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (1 year) to 0.43 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SMOT vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMOT	NLR
Healthcare	23.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	15.1%	-
Industrials	14.5%	18.9%
Technology	11.0%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	10.6%	-
Basic Materials	9.1%	2.3%
Financial Services	7.9%	-
Communication Services	3.3%	-
Real Estate	2.3%	-
Energy	1.7%	48.0%
Utilities	0.7%	29.2%

Return for Risk

SMOT vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

SMOT

SMOT Risk / Return Rank: 35
SMOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
SMOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
SMOT Omega Ratio Rank: 31
SMOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
SMOT Martin Ratio Rank: 40

NLR

NLR Risk / Return Rank: 8
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 9
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 7

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

SMOT vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar SMID Moat ETF (SMOT) 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.

	SMOT	NLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.00	-0.18	+1.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.56	0.05	+1.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.01	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.58	-0.21	+1.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.04	-0.47	+5.51

SMOT vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMOT Sharpe Ratio is 1.00, which is higher than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of -0.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMOT and NLR, 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

SMOT vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMOT drawdown since its inception was -23.36%, smaller than the maximum NLR drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMOT and NLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMOT	NLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.36%	-65.05%	+41.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.91%	-36.61%	+27.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.36%	-36.61%	+13.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-36.61%	+36.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.72%	-35.67%	+30.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.78%	16.04%	-13.26%

Volatility

SMOT vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Morningstar SMID Moat ETF (SMOT) is 3.66%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 9.40%. This indicates that SMOT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMOT	NLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.66%	9.40%	-5.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.07%	32.61%	-22.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.06%	43.12%	-29.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.33%	29.89%	-11.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.33%	24.42%	-6.09%

SMOT vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMOT has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMOT vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

SMOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%, less than NLR's 3.04% yield.

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%
SMOT VanEck Morningstar SMID Moat ETF	1.26%	1.37%	1.18%	0.65%	0.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMOT and NLR in my portfolio?

SMOT and NLR have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMOT or NLR?

NLR has higher volatility (9.40%) compared to SMOT (3.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMOT dropped -23.36% vs NLR's -65.05%.

Which ETF is better, SMOT or NLR?

On 3-year performance, NLR leads with 22.80% vs 9.86% for SMOT. On fees, SMOT is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, SMOT has been the lower-risk option at 3.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMOT or NLR?

Over the 3-year period, NLR has performed better with a 22.80% return vs 9.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMOT or NLR?

SMOT is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SMOT or NLR?

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 1.26% for SMOT.

What is the main difference between SMOT and NLR?

SMOT is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while NLR is Uranium. SMOT tracks Morningstar US Small-Mid Cap Moat Focus, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for SMOT and 0.56% for NLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.00 vs -0.18), 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.