URA vs. SCHG
URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - URA is a Uranium fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, URA returned 16.50%/yr vs 18.85%/yr for SCHG. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.
Performance
URA vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
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%
URA vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Industrials
Utilities
Basic Materials
Technology
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
URA
SCHG
Industrials
URA
SCHG
Utilities
URA
SCHG
Basic Materials
URA
SCHG
Technology
URA
SCHG
Communication Services
URA
-
SCHG
Consumer Cyclical
URA
-
SCHG
Consumer Defensive
URA
-
SCHG
Financial Services
URA
-
SCHG
Healthcare
URA
-
SCHG
Real Estate
URA
-
SCHG
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
URA
SCHG
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.
| URA | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| URA | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -45.46% | -3.06% | -42.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -74.93% | -5.20% | -69.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| URA | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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