UX vs. GUNR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and GUNR (FlexShares Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - UX is a Uranium fund actively managed by Roundhill, while GUNR is a Natural Resources fund tracking the Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index. UX is actively managed, while GUNR is passively managed. Over the past year, UX returned -0.88% vs 27.15% for GUNR. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UX charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for GUNR.

Performance

UX vs. GUNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and FlexShares Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index Fund (GUNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UX achieves a -5.87% return, which is significantly lower than GUNR's 9.71% return.

UX

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -4.39%
• YTD: -5.87%
• 6M: -5.85%
• 1Y: -0.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GUNR

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -7.63%
• YTD: 9.71%
• 6M: 9.10%
• 1Y: 27.15%
• 3Y*: 11.55%
• 5Y*: 8.96%
• 10Y*: 10.46%

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

UX vs. GUNR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	-5.87%	18.96%
GUNR FlexShares Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index Fund	9.71%	24.74%

Correlation

The correlation between UX and GUNR is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

UX vs. GUNR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UX	GUNR
Energy	100.0%	29.6%
Basic Materials	-	49.4%
Communication Services	-	1.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	12.1%
Financial Services	-	2.9%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	2.6%
Real Estate	-	0.3%
Technology	-	0.5%
Utilities	-	4.4%

Return for Risk

UX vs. GUNR — 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: 8

GUNR

GUNR Risk / Return Rank: 54
GUNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
GUNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
GUNR Omega Ratio Rank: 50
GUNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
GUNR Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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. GUNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and FlexShares Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index Fund (GUNR). 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	GUNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.03	1.71	-1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.21	2.24	-2.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.30	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	2.64	-2.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.07	11.45	-11.52

UX vs. GUNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UX Sharpe Ratio is -0.03, which is lower than the GUNR Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UX and GUNR, 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. GUNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -24.92%, smaller than the maximum GUNR drawdown of -45.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and GUNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	UX	GUNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.92%	-45.64%	+20.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.92%	-10.31%	-14.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.59%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.06%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-43.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.84%	-10.31%	-13.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.58%	-10.39%	-0.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.97%	2.38%	+10.59%

Volatility

UX vs. GUNR - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) has a higher volatility of 7.95% compared to FlexShares Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index Fund (GUNR) at 5.24%. This indicates that UX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GUNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UX	GUNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.95%	5.24%	+2.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.25%	13.31%	+10.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.10%	15.93%	+18.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.99%	19.02%	+16.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.99%	20.37%	+15.62%

UX vs. GUNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

UX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GUNR's 0.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

UX vs. GUNR - Dividend Comparison

UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, less than GUNR's 2.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GUNR FlexShares Morningstar Global Upstream Natural Resources Index Fund	2.44%	2.81%	3.39%	3.55%	4.12%	3.61%	2.79%	3.25%	3.27%	2.00%	1.73%	4.50%
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	1.57%	1.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UX and GUNR in my portfolio?

UX and GUNR have a correlation of 0.37, 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 GUNR?

UX has higher volatility (7.95%) compared to GUNR (5.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -24.92% vs GUNR's -45.64%.

Which ETF is better, UX or GUNR?

On 1-year performance, GUNR leads with 27.15% vs -0.88% for UX. On fees, GUNR is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, GUNR has been the lower-risk option at 5.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UX or GUNR?

Over the 1-year period, GUNR has performed better with a 27.15% return vs -0.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UX or GUNR?

GUNR is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UX.

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

GUNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.44%, compared with 1.57% for UX.

What is the main difference between UX and GUNR?

UX is categorized as Uranium, while GUNR is Natural Resources. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Northern Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UX and 0.46% for GUNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GUNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs -0.03), 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.