PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
URA vs. IBIC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

URA vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URA achieves a 17.93% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.37% 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%

IBIC

1D
0.02%
1M
0.27%
YTD
2.37%
6M
2.51%
1Y
4.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

URA vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
17.93%67.18%-0.58%9.99%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
2.37%4.96%5.25%2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and IBIC is -0.17, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2023

-0.00

The correlation between URA and IBIC shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

URA vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA
URA Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). 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.


URAIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-7.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

2.24

-1.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.17

17.27

-15.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.58

67.45

-62.87

URA vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 5.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and IBIC, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


URAIBICDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.23

5.05

-3.82

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

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

3.49

-3.54

Drawdowns

URA vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


URAIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-93.54%

-0.90%

-92.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-28.43%

-0.26%

-28.17%

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

-42.81%

-0.13%

-42.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-75.01%

-0.10%

-74.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.40%

0.07%

+13.33%

Volatility

URA vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 15.94% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.33%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


URAIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.94%

0.33%

+15.61%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

38.29%

0.67%

+37.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

50.19%

0.90%

+49.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

43.62%

1.58%

+42.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

37.73%

1.58%

+36.15%

URA vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

URA vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.14%, more than IBIC's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%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


URA and IBIC have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URA has higher volatility (15.94%) compared to IBIC (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, URA leads with 61.26% vs 4.54% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, URA has performed better with a 61.26% return vs 4.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.14%, compared with 3.59% for IBIC.

URA is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.05 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for URA and IBIC

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