URNM vs. BLOK

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

URNM (Sprott Uranium Miners ETF) and BLOK (Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - URNM is a Uranium fund tracking the VettaFi Global Uranium Miners Index, while BLOK is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Amplify. URNM is passively managed, while BLOK is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, URNM returned 12.61%/yr vs 11.50%/yr for BLOK. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. URNM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for BLOK.

Performance

URNM vs. BLOK - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, URNM achieves a -0.56% return, which is significantly lower than BLOK's 12.57% return.

URNM

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: -9.26%
• YTD: -0.56%
• 6M: -0.53%
• 1Y: 30.38%
• 3Y*: 20.14%
• 5Y*: 12.61%
• 10Y*: —

BLOK

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: 2.06%
• YTD: 12.57%
• 6M: 5.60%
• 1Y: 26.82%
• 3Y*: 50.68%
• 5Y*: 11.50%
• 10Y*: —

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

URNM vs. BLOK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
URNM Sprott Uranium Miners ETF	-0.56%	40.78%	-14.13%	57.80%	-11.86%	78.32%	68.36%	4.05%
BLOK Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF	12.57%	32.64%	53.12%	99.62%	-62.36%	30.76%	90.17%	3.48%

Correlation

The correlation between URNM and BLOK is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.40
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2019	0.47

The correlation between URNM and BLOK shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (3 years) to 0.50 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

URNM vs. BLOK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	URNM	BLOK
Energy	97.7%	-
Basic Materials	2.3%	-
Communication Services	-	3.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	59.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	0.7%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Technology	-	29.0%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

URNM vs. BLOK — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

BLOK

BLOK Risk / Return Rank: 20
BLOK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
BLOK Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
BLOK Omega Ratio Rank: 22
BLOK Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
BLOK Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

URNM vs. BLOK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM) and Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK). 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.

	URNM	BLOK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.60	0.63	-0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.18	1.08	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.13	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.82	0.69	+0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.00	1.49	+0.51

URNM vs. BLOK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URNM Sharpe Ratio is 0.60, which is comparable to the BLOK Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URNM and BLOK, 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

URNM vs. BLOK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URNM drawdown since its inception was -50.78%, smaller than the maximum BLOK drawdown of -73.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URNM and BLOK.

Drawdown Indicators

	URNM	BLOK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.78%	-73.33%	+22.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-38.72%	-35.64%	-3.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-50.78%	-35.64%	-15.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.78%	-73.33%	+22.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.02%	-12.97%	-22.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.09%	-26.03%	+7.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.78%	16.41%	-0.63%

Volatility

URNM vs. BLOK - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM) has a higher volatility of 17.40% compared to Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK) at 13.34%. This indicates that URNM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLOK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	URNM	BLOK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.40%	13.34%	+4.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	41.84%	30.02%	+11.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	52.48%	39.18%	+13.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	48.58%	42.53%	+6.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.04%	39.05%	+7.99%

URNM vs. BLOK - Expense Ratio Comparison

URNM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than BLOK's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

URNM vs. BLOK - Dividend Comparison

URNM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.19%, more than BLOK's 0.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BLOK Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF	0.64%	0.72%	6.00%	1.15%	0.00%	14.31%	1.88%	2.05%	1.30%
URNM Sprott Uranium Miners ETF	3.19%	3.18%	3.18%	3.63%	0.00%	6.70%	2.57%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both URNM and BLOK in my portfolio?

URNM and BLOK have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, URNM or BLOK?

URNM has higher volatility (17.40%) compared to BLOK (13.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URNM dropped -50.78% vs BLOK's -73.33%.

Which ETF is better, URNM or BLOK?

On 5-year performance, URNM leads with 12.61% vs 11.50% for BLOK. On fees, BLOK is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, BLOK has been the lower-risk option at 13.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, URNM or BLOK?

Over the 5-year period, URNM has performed better with a 12.61% return vs 11.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URNM or BLOK?

BLOK is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for URNM.

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

URNM has the higher dividend yield at 3.19%, compared with 0.64% for BLOK.

What is the main difference between URNM and BLOK?

URNM is categorized as Uranium, while BLOK is Blockchain. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for URNM and 0.70% for BLOK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLOK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 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.