URA vs. BATT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and BATT (Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds. URA is passively managed, while BATT is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, URA returned 21.39%/yr vs 3.45%/yr for BATT. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for BATT.

Performance

URA vs. BATT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URA achieves a 17.93% return, which is significantly lower than BATT's 26.16% return.

URA

• 1D: -5.67%
• 1M: -8.00%
• YTD: 17.93%
• 6M: 13.25%
• 1Y: 61.26%
• 3Y*: 39.27%
• 5Y*: 21.39%
• 10Y*: 17.12%

BATT

• 1D: -1.64%
• 1M: 4.50%
• YTD: 26.16%
• 6M: 29.61%
• 1Y: 103.56%
• 3Y*: 14.36%
• 5Y*: 3.45%
• 10Y*: —

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

URA vs. BATT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
URA Global X Uranium ETF	17.93%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	57.57%	41.33%	-3.54%	-20.31%
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	26.16%	59.70%	-13.93%	-7.05%	-32.25%	16.52%	44.43%	-2.40%	-42.45%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and BATT is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 7, 2018	0.56

The correlation between URA and BATT shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (3 years) to 0.64 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

URA vs. BATT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	URA	BATT
Energy	57.0%	-
Industrials	21.9%	16.9%
Utilities	9.4%	-
Basic Materials	5.0%	57.0%
Technology	0.9%	5.6%
Communication Services	-	0.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	18.9%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

URA vs. BATT — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 34
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 31
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 30

BATT

BATT Risk / Return Rank: 87
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

URA vs. BATT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT). 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.

	URA	BATT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	3.38	-2.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	3.69	-1.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.50	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.17	6.12	-3.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.58	22.20	-17.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

URA vs. BATT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the BATT Sharpe Ratio of 3.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and BATT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	URA	BATT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	3.38	-2.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	0.12	+0.38
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	0.01	-0.06

Drawdowns

URA vs. BATT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than BATT's maximum drawdown of -69.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and BATT.

Drawdown Indicators

	URA	BATT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.54%	-69.38%	-24.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.43%	-17.03%	-11.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.81%	-47.65%	+9.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.90%	-61.98%	+24.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.81%	-3.44%	-39.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-75.01%	-34.78%	-40.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.40%	4.68%	+8.72%

Volatility

URA vs. BATT - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 15.94% compared to Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) at 10.29%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BATT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	URA	BATT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.94%	10.29%	+5.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.29%	24.67%	+13.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.19%	30.80%	+19.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.62%	29.57%	+14.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.73%	30.60%	+7.13%

URA vs. BATT - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than BATT's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

URA vs. BATT - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.14%, more than BATT's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BATT Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF	1.47%	1.85%	3.17%	3.23%	4.14%	2.32%	0.21%	3.22%	0.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.14%	4.88%	2.86%	6.07%	0.76%	5.84%	1.69%	1.66%	0.44%	2.03%	7.28%	1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both URA and BATT in my portfolio?

URA and BATT have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, URA or BATT?

URA has higher volatility (15.94%) compared to BATT (10.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs BATT's -69.38%.

Which ETF is better, URA or BATT?

On 5-year performance, URA leads with 21.39% vs 3.45% for BATT. On fees, BATT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, BATT has been the lower-risk option at 10.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URA or BATT?

Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 21.39% return vs 3.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URA or BATT?

BATT is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, URA or BATT?

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.14%, compared with 1.47% for BATT.

What is the main difference between URA and BATT?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.59% for BATT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BATT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.38 vs 1.23), 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.