URA vs. URNM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and URNM (Sprott Uranium Miners ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds - URA tracks the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index while URNM tracks the VettaFi Global Uranium Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, URA returned 18.77%/yr vs 12.61%/yr for URNM. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for URNM.

Performance

URA vs. URNM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URA achieves a 6.53% return, which is significantly higher than URNM's -0.56% 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%

URNM

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: -14.56%
• YTD: -0.56%
• 6M: -0.53%
• 1Y: 31.54%
• 3Y*: 20.14%
• 5Y*: 12.61%
• 10Y*: —

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

URA vs. URNM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
URA Global X Uranium ETF	6.53%	67.18%	-0.58%	46.25%	-11.32%	57.57%	41.33%	3.53%
URNM Sprott Uranium Miners ETF	-0.56%	40.78%	-14.13%	57.80%	-11.86%	78.32%	68.36%	4.05%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and URNM is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2019	0.94

The correlation between URA and URNM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

URA vs. URNM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	URA	URNM
Energy	58.2%	97.4%
Industrials	20.9%	-
Utilities	9.2%	-
Basic Materials	5.0%	2.6%
Technology	0.9%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

URA vs. URNM — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 23
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 23
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 21

URNM

URNM Risk / Return Rank: 22
URNM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
URNM Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
URNM Omega Ratio Rank: 23
URNM Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
URNM Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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. URNM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM). 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	URNM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.64	0.60	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.21	1.18	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.14	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.04	0.82	+0.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.30	2.00	+0.30

URA vs. URNM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 0.64, which is comparable to the URNM Sharpe Ratio of 0.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA and URNM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

URA vs. URNM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than URNM's maximum drawdown of -50.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and URNM.

Drawdown Indicators

	URA	URNM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.54%	-50.78%	-42.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.48%	-38.72%	+7.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.81%	-50.78%	+12.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.90%	-50.78%	+12.88%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-48.34%	-35.02%	-13.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-74.94%	-18.09%	-56.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.12%	15.78%	-1.66%

Volatility

URA vs. URNM - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) and Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM) have volatilities of 17.69% and 17.40%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	URA	URNM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.69%	17.40%	+0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.95%	41.84%	-1.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.24%	52.48%	-1.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.96%	48.58%	-4.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.91%	47.04%	-9.13%

URA vs. URNM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

URA vs. URNM - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than URNM's 3.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
URNM Sprott Uranium Miners ETF	3.19%	3.18%	3.18%	3.63%	0.00%	6.70%	2.57%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both URA and URNM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, URA and URNM 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 URNM?

URA has higher volatility (17.69%) compared to URNM (17.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs URNM's -50.78%.

Which ETF is better, URA or URNM?

On 5-year performance, URA leads with 18.77% vs 12.61% for URNM. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, URNM has been the lower-risk option at 17.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URA or URNM?

Over the 5-year period, URA has performed better with a 18.77% return vs 12.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URA or URNM?

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

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

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 3.19% for URNM.

What is the main difference between URA and URNM?

URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while URNM tracks VettaFi Global Uranium Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Sprott. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 0.85% for URNM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

URA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.64 vs 0.60), 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.