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

Performance

URA vs. LNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG). 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 6.53% return, which is significantly lower than LNG's 24.74% return. Over the past 10 years, URA has underperformed LNG with an annualized return of 15.90%, while LNG has yielded a comparatively higher 22.78% annualized return.


URA

1D
1.54%
1M
-14.61%
YTD
6.53%
6M
3.57%
1Y
32.44%
3Y*
32.17%
5Y*
18.77%
10Y*
15.90%

LNG

1D
0.47%
1M
0.79%
YTD
24.74%
6M
28.05%
1Y
3.66%
3Y*
19.57%
5Y*
23.34%
10Y*
22.78%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

URA vs. LNG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
6.53%67.18%-0.58%46.25%-11.32%57.57%41.33%-3.54%-22.11%19.36%
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
24.74%-8.70%27.18%15.02%49.30%69.48%-1.70%3.18%9.94%29.95%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and LNG is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.05

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.15

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.30

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2010

0.34

The correlation between URA and LNG shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.34 (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. LNG — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA
URA Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2525
Calmar Ratio Rank
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

LNG
LNG Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
LNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
LNG Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
LNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
LNG Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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. LNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG). 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.


URALNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.05

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.04

0.15

+0.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.30

0.31

+1.99

URA vs. LNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is higher than the LNG Sharpe Ratio of 0.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and LNG, 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...

Drawdowns

URA vs. LNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, roughly equal to the maximum LNG drawdown of -97.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and LNG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


URALNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-93.54%

-97.84%

+4.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-31.48%

-24.09%

-7.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-37.81%

-24.87%

-12.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.90%

-24.87%

-13.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.45%

-57.53%

-3.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-48.34%

-18.55%

-29.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-74.94%

-43.14%

-31.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

14.12%

11.88%

+2.24%

Volatility

URA vs. LNG - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 17.69% compared to Cheniere Energy, Inc. (LNG) at 7.19%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


URALNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

17.69%

7.19%

+10.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

39.95%

21.49%

+18.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

51.24%

27.02%

+24.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

43.96%

30.27%

+13.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

37.91%

32.50%

+5.41%

Dividends

URA vs. LNG - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than LNG's 0.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LNG
Cheniere Energy, Inc.
0.90%1.06%0.84%0.95%0.92%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
4.58%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 LNG have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URA has higher volatility (17.69%) compared to LNG (7.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs LNG's -97.84%.

URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs 0.14), 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 LNG

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