UX vs. CCNR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and CCNR (ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UX is a Uranium fund actively managed by Roundhill, while CCNR is a Natural Resources fund actively managed by ALPS. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, UX returned 0.67% vs 52.68% for CCNR. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UX charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for CCNR.

Performance

UX vs. CCNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UX achieves a -5.73% return, which is significantly lower than CCNR's 17.60% return.

UX

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: -4.25%
• YTD: -5.73%
• 6M: -3.70%
• 1Y: 0.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CCNR

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: -6.50%
• YTD: 17.60%
• 6M: 17.78%
• 1Y: 52.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UX vs. CCNR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	-5.73%	18.96%
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	17.60%	42.54%

Correlation

The correlation between UX and CCNR is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2025	0.37

UX vs. CCNR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UX	CCNR
Energy	100.0%	34.5%
Basic Materials	-	34.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	8.3%
Financial Services	-	0.6%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	7.1%
Real Estate	-	0.5%
Technology	-	6.0%
Utilities	-	9.4%

Return for Risk

UX vs. CCNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

UX

UX Risk / Return Rank: 9
UX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
UX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
UX Omega Ratio Rank: 9
UX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
UX Martin Ratio Rank: 9

CCNR

CCNR Risk / Return Rank: 88
CCNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CCNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
CCNR Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CCNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
CCNR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

UX vs. CCNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR). 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.

	UX	CCNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.02	2.83	-2.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.27	3.49	-3.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	1.48	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.03	5.86	-5.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.05	22.23	-22.18

UX vs. CCNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UX Sharpe Ratio is 0.02, which is lower than the CCNR Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UX and CCNR, 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

UX vs. CCNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -24.92%, which is greater than CCNR's maximum drawdown of -20.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and CCNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	UX	CCNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.92%	-20.06%	-4.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.92%	-9.04%	-15.88%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.73%	-8.57%	-15.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.54%	-3.62%	-6.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.88%	2.38%	+10.50%

Volatility

UX vs. CCNR - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) has a higher volatility of 8.00% compared to ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) at 6.85%. This indicates that UX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UX	CCNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.00%	6.85%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.86%	13.97%	+10.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.17%	18.74%	+15.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.04%	20.12%	+15.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.04%	20.12%	+15.92%

UX vs. CCNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

UX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CCNR's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

UX vs. CCNR - Dividend Comparison

UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, less than CCNR's 2.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	2.96%	3.48%	1.27%
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	1.57%	1.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UX and CCNR in my portfolio?

UX and CCNR have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UX or CCNR?

UX has higher volatility (8.00%) compared to CCNR (6.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -24.92% vs CCNR's -20.06%.

Which ETF is better, UX or CCNR?

On 1-year performance, CCNR leads with 52.68% vs 0.67% for UX. On fees, CCNR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, CCNR has been the lower-risk option at 6.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UX or CCNR?

Over the 1-year period, CCNR has performed better with a 52.68% return vs 0.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UX or CCNR?

CCNR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UX or CCNR?

CCNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 1.57% for UX.

What is the main difference between UX and CCNR?

UX is categorized as Uranium, while CCNR is Natural Resources. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and ALPS. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UX and 0.39% for CCNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CCNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs 0.02), 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.