URA vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds from Global X - URA tracks the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index while LIT tracks the Solactive Global Lithium Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, URA returned 17.12%/yr vs 14.81%/yr for LIT. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LIT.

Performance

URA vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). 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 LIT's 30.84% return. Over the past 10 years, URA has outperformed LIT with an annualized return of 17.12%, while LIT has yielded a comparatively lower 14.81% annualized 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%

LIT

• 1D: -1.78%
• 1M: -2.59%
• YTD: 30.84%
• 6M: 34.89%
• 1Y: 135.24%
• 3Y*: 11.20%
• 5Y*: 4.98%
• 10Y*: 14.81%

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

URA vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
URA Global X Uranium ETF	17.93%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	57.57%	41.33%	-3.54%	-22.11%	19.36%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	30.84%	60.05%	-19.19%	-12.18%	-29.91%	36.74%	127.88%	3.27%	-28.63%	64.19%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and LIT is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 8, 2010	0.52

The correlation between URA and LIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.43 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

URA vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	URA	LIT
Energy	57.0%	-
Industrials	21.9%	26.0%
Utilities	9.4%	-
Basic Materials	5.0%	55.4%
Technology	0.9%	11.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	7.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

URA vs. LIT — 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

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 94
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 90
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). 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	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	4.16	-2.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	4.45	-2.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.59	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.17	10.37	-8.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.58	35.19	-30.60
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. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 4.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and LIT, 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	LIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	4.16	-2.94
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	0.16	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	0.48	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	0.27	-0.32

Drawdowns

URA vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than LIT's maximum drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	URA	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.54%	-65.91%	-27.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.43%	-13.11%	-15.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.81%	-53.01%	+15.20%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.90%	-65.91%	+28.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.45%	-65.91%	+4.46%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.81%	-8.53%	-34.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-75.01%	-33.63%	-41.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.40%	3.86%	+9.54%

Volatility

URA vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 15.94% compared to Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) at 8.67%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	URA	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.94%	8.67%	+7.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.29%	22.00%	+16.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.19%	32.68%	+17.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.62%	31.83%	+11.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.73%	30.66%	+7.07%

URA vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than LIT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

URA vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.14%, more than LIT's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	0.37%	0.49%	0.93%	1.11%	0.99%	0.22%	0.40%	1.85%	2.52%	3.26%	2.15%	0.24%
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 LIT in my portfolio?

URA and LIT have a correlation of 0.51, 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 LIT?

URA has higher volatility (15.94%) compared to LIT (8.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, URA or LIT?

On 10-year performance, URA leads with 17.12% vs 14.81% for LIT. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, LIT has been the lower-risk option at 8.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URA or LIT?

Over the 10-year period, URA has performed better with a 17.12% return vs 14.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URA or LIT?

URA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LIT.

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

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.14%, compared with 0.37% for LIT.

What is the main difference between URA and LIT?

URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while LIT tracks Solactive Global Lithium Index. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.75% for LIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.16 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.