PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLF vs. NLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XLF vs. NLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLF achieves a -4.62% return, which is significantly lower than NLR's -0.79% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with XLF having a 12.79% annualized return and NLR not far behind at 12.72%.


XLF

1D
-0.63%
1M
1.42%
YTD
-4.62%
6M
-1.98%
1Y
2.91%
3Y*
18.06%
5Y*
8.47%
10Y*
12.79%

NLR

1D
0.91%
1M
-12.54%
YTD
-0.79%
6M
-6.08%
1Y
26.72%
3Y*
31.16%
5Y*
20.16%
10Y*
12.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLF vs. NLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
-4.62%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
-0.79%56.50%14.26%36.67%2.29%13.63%3.49%0.20%4.94%8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between XLF and NLR is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.34

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2007

0.49

The correlation between XLF and NLR shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XLF vs. NLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XLF
NLR

Financial Services

98.0%

-

Technology

1.8%
1.5%

Industrials

0.2%
15.1%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

46.0%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

37.4%

Financial Services

XLF
98.0%
NLR

-

Technology

XLF
1.8%
NLR
1.5%

Industrials

XLF
0.2%
NLR
15.1%

Basic Materials

XLF

-

NLR

-

Communication Services

XLF

-

NLR

-

Consumer Cyclical

XLF

-

NLR

-

Consumer Defensive

XLF

-

NLR

-

Energy

XLF

-

NLR
46.0%

Healthcare

XLF

-

NLR

-

Real Estate

XLF

-

NLR

-

Utilities

XLF

-

NLR
37.4%

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

XLF vs. NLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

NLR
NLR Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
NLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
NLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
NLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
NLR Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XLF vs. NLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR). 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.


XLFNLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.13

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.20

1.04

-0.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.51

2.08

-1.57

XLF vs. NLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLF Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the NLR Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLF and NLR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XLFNLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.20

0.63

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

0.69

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

0.53

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.21

0.16

+0.04

Drawdowns

XLF vs. NLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than NLR's maximum drawdown of -65.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and NLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLFNLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.69%

-65.05%

-17.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.79%

-25.80%

+11.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.54%

-30.48%

+14.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.81%

-30.48%

+4.67%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.86%

-34.35%

-8.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.38%

-25.03%

+17.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.02%

-35.71%

+15.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.71%

12.87%

-7.16%

Volatility

XLF vs. NLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.20%, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NLR) has a volatility of 13.36%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XLFNLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.20%

13.36%

-9.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.18%

33.24%

-22.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.61%

42.96%

-28.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.66%

29.43%

-10.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.18%

24.14%

-1.96%

XLF vs. NLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than NLR's 0.56% expense ratio.


Dividends

XLF vs. NLR - Dividend Comparison

XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than NLR's 2.57% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
NLR
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF
2.57%2.55%0.76%4.54%2.02%1.99%2.23%2.21%3.91%4.86%3.62%3.30%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.52%1.31%1.42%1.71%2.04%1.63%2.03%1.87%2.08%1.48%21.10%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


XLF and NLR have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NLR has higher volatility (13.36%) compared to XLF (4.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs NLR's -65.05%.

On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 12.79% vs 12.72% for NLR. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 12.79% return vs 12.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for NLR.

NLR has the higher dividend yield at 2.57%, compared with 1.52% for XLF.

XLF is categorized as Financials Equities, while NLR is Alternative Energy Equities. XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while NLR tracks MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.56% for NLR.

NLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 vs 0.20), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XLF and NLR

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