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

Performance

URA vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 12.47% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 5.03% return. Over the past 10 years, URA has underperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 16.50%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.85% annualized return.


URA

1D
5.58%
1M
-3.75%
YTD
12.47%
6M
12.83%
1Y
39.37%
3Y*
34.52%
5Y*
21.19%
10Y*
16.50%

SCHG

1D
2.39%
1M
-0.12%
YTD
5.03%
6M
5.98%
1Y
23.20%
3Y*
23.27%
5Y*
14.85%
10Y*
18.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

URA vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
12.47%67.18%-0.58%46.25%-11.32%57.57%41.33%-3.54%-22.11%19.36%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
5.03%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%39.14%36.02%-1.36%28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and SCHG is 0.57, 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

0.57

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

0.48

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

0.49

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

0.47

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

0.51

The correlation between URA and SCHG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

URA vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
URA
SCHG

Energy

64.2%
0.7%

Industrials

22.7%
6.0%

Utilities

7.4%
0.4%

Basic Materials

4.8%
1.3%

Technology

0.9%
46.7%

Communication Services

-

15.3%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.6%

Financial Services

-

6.6%

Healthcare

-

8.4%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Energy

URA
64.2%
SCHG
0.7%

Industrials

URA
22.7%
SCHG
6.0%

Utilities

URA
7.4%
SCHG
0.4%

Basic Materials

URA
4.8%
SCHG
1.3%

Technology

URA
0.9%
SCHG
46.7%

Communication Services

URA

-

SCHG
15.3%

Consumer Cyclical

URA

-

SCHG
12.4%

Consumer Defensive

URA

-

SCHG
1.6%

Financial Services

URA

-

SCHG
6.6%

Healthcare

URA

-

SCHG
8.4%

Real Estate

URA

-

SCHG
0.5%

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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA
URA Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
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. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.


URASCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.68

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.26

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.26

1.42

-0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.78

4.68

-1.90

URA vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is lower than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and SCHG, 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. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


URASCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-93.54%

-34.59%

-58.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-31.48%

-16.41%

-15.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-37.81%

-23.39%

-14.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.90%

-34.59%

-3.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.45%

-34.59%

-26.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-45.46%

-3.06%

-42.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-74.93%

-5.20%

-69.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

14.19%

4.97%

+9.22%

Volatility

URA vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 18.71% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 5.59%. This indicates that URA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


URASCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

18.71%

5.59%

+13.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

40.22%

12.52%

+27.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

51.62%

16.09%

+35.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

43.93%

22.35%

+21.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

37.95%

21.60%

+16.35%

URA vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

URA vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.34%, more than SCHG's 0.37% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.37%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%
URA
Global X Uranium ETF
4.34%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 SCHG have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

URA has higher volatility (18.71%) compared to SCHG (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 10-year performance, SCHG leads with 18.85% vs 16.50% for URA. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 5.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 18.85% return vs 16.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 0.37% for SCHG.

URA is categorized as Uranium, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.04% for SCHG.

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 vs 0.77), 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 SCHG

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