URA vs. BTCI

Last updated Jun 21, 2026

URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and BTCI (NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while BTCI is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Neos. URA is passively managed, while BTCI is actively managed. Over the past year, URA returned 36.15% vs -34.62% for BTCI. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BTCI.

Performance

URA vs. BTCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URA achieves a 11.82% return, which is significantly higher than BTCI's -25.54% return.

URA

• 1D: 1.44%
• 1M: -2.41%
• YTD: 11.82%
• 6M: 9.09%
• 1Y: 36.15%
• 3Y*: 34.26%
• 5Y*: 22.77%
• 10Y*: 16.35%

BTCI

• 1D: -2.32%
• 1M: -16.42%
• YTD: -25.54%
• 6M: -25.93%
• 1Y: -34.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

URA vs. BTCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
URA Global X Uranium ETF	11.82%	67.18%	-14.97%
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF	-25.54%	-1.09%	26.12%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and BTCI is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2024	0.41

Return for Risk

URA vs. BTCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 21
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 21
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 20

BTCI

BTCI Risk / Return Rank: 2
BTCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
BTCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
BTCI Omega Ratio Rank: 3
BTCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
BTCI Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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. BTCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI). 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.

	URA	BTCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.64	-0.89	+1.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.21	-1.19	+2.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	0.86	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	-0.74	+1.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.26	-1.31	+3.57

URA vs. BTCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is higher than the BTCI Sharpe Ratio of -0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and BTCI, 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

URA vs. BTCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than BTCI's maximum drawdown of -47.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and BTCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	URA	BTCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.54%	-47.16%	-46.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.48%	-47.16%	+15.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.90%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-45.78%	-44.94%	-0.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.91%	-15.92%	-58.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.41%	26.71%	-12.30%

Volatility

URA vs. BTCI - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 17.77% compared to NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI) at 12.11%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BTCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	URA	BTCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.77%	12.11%	+5.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.65%	31.18%	+8.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.29%	39.53%	+11.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.88%	40.31%	+3.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.94%	40.31%	-2.37%

URA vs. BTCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than BTCI's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

URA vs. BTCI - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%, less than BTCI's 48.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF	48.02%	36.46%	6.76%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.36%	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 BTCI in my portfolio?

URA and BTCI have a correlation of 0.42, 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 BTCI?

URA has higher volatility (17.77%) compared to BTCI (12.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs BTCI's -47.16%.

Which ETF is better, URA or BTCI?

On 1-year performance, URA leads with 36.15% vs -34.62% for BTCI. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, BTCI has been the lower-risk option at 12.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URA or BTCI?

Over the 1-year period, URA has performed better with a 36.15% return vs -34.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URA or BTCI?

URA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BTCI.

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

BTCI has the higher dividend yield at 48.02%, compared with 4.36% for URA.

What is the main difference between URA and BTCI?

URA is categorized as Uranium, while BTCI is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.99% for BTCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs -0.89), 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.