UX vs. ICOP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and ICOP (iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds. UX is actively managed, while ICOP is passively managed. Over the past year, UX returned 17.18% vs 102.60% for ICOP. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UX charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for ICOP.

Performance

UX vs. ICOP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UX achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than ICOP's 27.29% return.

UX

• 1D: -2.53%
• 1M: -3.11%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: 6.59%
• 1Y: 17.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ICOP

• 1D: -3.29%
• 1M: 17.09%
• YTD: 27.29%
• 6M: 37.08%
• 1Y: 102.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UX vs. ICOP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	-0.61%	15.76%
ICOP iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF	27.29%	75.80%

Correlation

The correlation between UX and ICOP is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	0.42

UX vs. ICOP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UX	ICOP
Energy	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	100.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

UX vs. ICOP — Risk / Return Rank

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

UX

UX Risk / Return Rank: 17
UX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
UX Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
UX Omega Ratio Rank: 18
UX Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
UX Martin Ratio Rank: 16

ICOP

ICOP Risk / Return Rank: 74
ICOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
ICOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
ICOP Omega Ratio Rank: 68
ICOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
ICOP Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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. ICOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP). 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.

	UX	ICOP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	2.77	-2.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.93	3.11	-2.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.42	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	3.95	-3.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.45	14.50	-13.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UX vs. ICOP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UX Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the ICOP Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UX and ICOP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UX	ICOP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	2.77	-2.26
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	1.08	-0.77

Drawdowns

UX vs. ICOP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, smaller than the maximum ICOP drawdown of -38.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and ICOP.

Drawdown Indicators

	UX	ICOP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.72%	-38.67%	+14.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.72%	-26.13%	+2.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.59%	-3.29%	-16.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.13%	-11.67%	+1.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.87%	7.10%	+4.77%

Volatility

UX vs. ICOP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) is 8.07%, while iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF (ICOP) has a volatility of 13.69%. This indicates that UX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICOP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UX	ICOP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.07%	13.69%	-5.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.59%	32.28%	-7.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.45%	37.29%	-2.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.20%	33.77%	+2.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.20%	33.77%	+2.43%

UX vs. ICOP - Expense Ratio Comparison

UX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than ICOP's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

UX vs. ICOP - Dividend Comparison

UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, less than ICOP's 1.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
ICOP iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF	1.63%	2.08%	1.87%	2.15%
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	1.49%	1.48%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UX and ICOP in my portfolio?

UX and ICOP have a correlation of 0.40, 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 ICOP?

ICOP has higher volatility (13.69%) compared to UX (8.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -23.72% vs ICOP's -38.67%.

Which ETF is better, UX or ICOP?

On 1-year performance, ICOP leads with 102.60% vs 17.18% for UX. On fees, ICOP is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, UX has been the lower-risk option at 8.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UX or ICOP?

Over the 1-year period, ICOP has performed better with a 102.60% return vs 17.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UX or ICOP?

ICOP is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for UX.

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

ICOP has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 1.49% for UX.

What is the main difference between UX and ICOP?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UX and 0.47% for ICOP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICOP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 0.50), 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.