XCLR vs. URA
XCLR (Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF) and URA (Global X Uranium ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XCLR is a Equity Hedged fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 3-Month Collar 95-110 Index, while URA is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XCLR returned 13.42%/yr vs 39.27%/yr for URA. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XCLR charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for URA.
Performance
XCLR vs. URA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCLR achieves a 2.37% return, which is significantly lower than URA's 17.93% return.
XCLR
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 2.04%
- YTD
- 2.37%
- 6M
- 2.16%
- 1Y
- 13.37%
- 3Y*
- 13.42%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
URA
- 1D
- -5.67%
- 1M
- -8.00%
- YTD
- 17.93%
- 6M
- 13.25%
- 1Y
- 61.26%
- 3Y*
- 39.27%
- 5Y*
- 21.39%
- 10Y*
- 17.12%
XCLR vs. URA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCLR Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF | 2.37% | 10.25% | 20.67% | 15.64% | -12.93% | 3.44% |
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 17.93% | 67.18% | -0.58% | 46.25% | -11.32% | 26.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCLR and URA is 0.52, 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 | 0.52 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021 | 0.50 |
The correlation between XCLR and URA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.
XCLR vs. URA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XCLR
URA
Technology
Financial Services
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
XCLR
URA
Financial Services
XCLR
URA
-
Communication Services
XCLR
URA
-
Consumer Cyclical
XCLR
URA
-
Healthcare
XCLR
URA
-
Industrials
XCLR
URA
Consumer Defensive
XCLR
URA
-
Energy
XCLR
URA
Utilities
XCLR
URA
Real Estate
XCLR
URA
-
Basic Materials
XCLR
URA
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XCLR vs. URA — Risk / Return Rank
XCLR
URA
XCLR vs. URA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF (XCLR) and Global X Uranium ETF (URA). 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.
| XCLR | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.22 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.62 | 2.17 | -0.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.51 | 4.58 | +1.93 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XCLR | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.57 | 1.23 | +0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.73 | -0.05 | +0.78 |
Drawdowns
XCLR vs. URA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCLR drawdown since its inception was -14.63%, smaller than the maximum URA drawdown of -93.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCLR and URA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCLR | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.63% | -93.54% | +78.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.29% | -28.43% | +20.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.46% | -37.81% | +25.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -37.90% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -61.45% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.05% | -42.81% | +42.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.71% | -75.01% | +70.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | 13.40% | -11.34% |
Volatility
XCLR vs. URA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF (XCLR) is 0.61%, while Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a volatility of 15.94%. This indicates that XCLR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than URA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCLR | URA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.61% | 15.94% | -15.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.18% | 38.29% | -32.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.58% | 50.19% | -41.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.44% | 43.62% | -33.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.44% | 37.73% | -27.29% |
XCLR vs. URA - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCLR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than URA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
XCLR vs. URA - Dividend Comparison
XCLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.85%, more than URA's 4.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
URA Global X Uranium ETF | 4.14% | 4.88% | 2.86% | 6.07% | 0.76% | 5.84% | 1.69% | 1.66% | 0.44% | 2.03% | 7.28% | 1.96% |
XCLR Global X S&P 500 Collar 95-110 ETF | 12.85% | 13.15% | 18.76% | 1.40% | 1.01% | 1.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XCLR and URA have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
URA has higher volatility (15.94%) compared to XCLR (0.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCLR dropped -14.63% vs URA's -93.54%.
On 3-year performance, URA leads with 39.27% vs 13.42% for XCLR. On fees, XCLR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, XCLR has been the lower-risk option at 0.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, URA has performed better with a 39.27% return vs 13.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XCLR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for URA.
XCLR has the higher dividend yield at 12.85%, compared with 4.14% for URA.
XCLR is categorized as Equity Hedged, while URA is Commodity Producers Equities. XCLR tracks Cboe S&P 500 3-Month Collar 95-110 Index, while URA tracks Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XCLR and 0.69% for URA.
XCLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 1.23), 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.
Find the right allocation for XCLR and URA
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer