URA vs. NUKZ

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and NUKZ (Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - URA is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while NUKZ is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, URA returned 43.12% vs 33.97% for NUKZ. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for NUKZ.

Performance

URA vs. NUKZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URA achieves a 6.04% return, which is significantly lower than NUKZ's 7.53% return.

URA

• 1D: -9.88%
• 1M: -22.23%
• YTD: 6.04%
• 6M: -0.93%
• 1Y: 43.12%
• 3Y*: 33.77%
• 5Y*: 18.83%
• 10Y*: 15.20%

NUKZ

• 1D: -5.51%
• 1M: -10.43%
• YTD: 7.53%
• 6M: 3.44%
• 1Y: 33.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

URA vs. NUKZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
URA Global X Uranium ETF	6.04%	67.18%	-8.27%
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	7.53%	56.57%	62.98%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and NUKZ is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.82

The correlation between URA and NUKZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

URA vs. NUKZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	URA	NUKZ
Energy	57.0%	12.9%
Industrials	21.9%	45.9%
Utilities	9.4%	35.8%
Basic Materials	5.0%	4.0%
Technology	0.9%	1.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

URA vs. NUKZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 27
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 25
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 24

NUKZ

NUKZ Risk / Return Rank: 34
NUKZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
NUKZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
NUKZ Omega Ratio Rank: 30
NUKZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
NUKZ Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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. NUKZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ). 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	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.85	1.13	-0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.44	1.68	-0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.20	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.52	2.07	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.19	5.17	-1.98
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. NUKZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is comparable to the NUKZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and NUKZ, 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	NUKZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85	1.13	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.40	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.07	1.63	-1.70

Drawdowns

URA vs. NUKZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than NUKZ's maximum drawdown of -33.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and NUKZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	URA	NUKZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.54%	-33.03%	-60.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.43%	-16.51%	-11.92%
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	-48.58%	-10.43%	-38.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.99%	-6.02%	-68.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.56%	6.59%	+6.97%

Volatility

URA vs. NUKZ - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 16.84% compared to Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF (NUKZ) at 10.66%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NUKZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	URA	NUKZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.84%	10.66%	+6.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.54%	22.75%	+16.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.13%	30.26%	+20.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.81%	32.85%	+10.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.83%	32.85%	+4.98%

URA vs. NUKZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than NUKZ's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

URA vs. NUKZ - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%, more than NUKZ's 0.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance ETF	0.85%	0.91%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.60%	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 NUKZ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, URA and NUKZ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, URA or NUKZ?

URA has higher volatility (16.84%) compared to NUKZ (10.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs NUKZ's -33.03%.

Which ETF is better, URA or NUKZ?

On 1-year performance, URA leads with 43.12% vs 33.97% for NUKZ. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, NUKZ has been the lower-risk option at 10.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URA or NUKZ?

Over the 1-year period, URA has performed better with a 43.12% return vs 33.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URA or NUKZ?

URA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

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

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 0.85% for NUKZ.

What is the main difference between URA and NUKZ?

URA is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while NUKZ is Energy Equities. URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while NUKZ tracks Range Nuclear Renaissance Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.85% for NUKZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NUKZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.13 vs 0.85), 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.