NLR ranks 1st and URA 4th of 9 funds in the Uranium & Nuclear Category.
NLR vs URA
NLR −0.17pt a year
0.52%0.69%
URA 8.4×the volume
408K3.41M
URA +4.8pt
+9.7%+14.5%
NLR vs URA Performance
+86.0%+53.3%
- NLR 0.52%, better
- URA 0.69%
- NLR $3.1B
- URA $4.73B
- NLR −39.4%
- URA −35.8%, better
- NLR 3.45%
- URA 6.18%, better
- NLR 28
- URA 61
- NLR 408K sh
- URA 3.41M sh, better
- NLR $92.14
- URA $33.94
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | NLR | URA |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A90Higher | B62 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | C41Higher | D39 |
| Tradability | A82Higher | B67 |
| Holdings | C54Higher | C50 |
| Durability | A85 | A89Higher |
Rank among Uranium & Nuclear funds
Same Category. NLR and URA are both graded against the same 9 Uranium & Nuclear funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
NLRA
URAB
In short
NLR The original nuclear ETF, listed since 2007. NLR owns the whole chain (uranium miners, reactor builders, nuclear utilities, and the equipment firms serving them) at a lower fee than most of its rivals.
URA The original US uranium ETF, trading since 2010, long before the nuclear theme got crowded. It holds roughly 50 names spanning miners and nuclear-component makers, so the reactor supply chain rides along with the yellowcake.
Stated mandate
NLR The fund seeks to track the MVIS Global Uranium & Nuclear Energy Index before fees and expenses. The index covers companies involved in uranium mining, nuclear-facility and reactor construction, engineering and maintenance, nuclear electricity generation, and nuclear-industry equipment, technology, or services.
URA The fund seeks to track, before fees and expenses, the performance of the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index. It concentrates at least 80% of assets in companies involved in uranium or nuclear-component activities.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
NLR vs URA Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
NLR vs URA Cost
Overpaying URA vs NLR
$3,078
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
NLR 0.52%
$10,351
URA 0.69%
$13,429
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | NLR | URA | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $935 | $1,232 | $297 |
| 20 | $3,593 | $4,697 | $1,104 |
| 30 | $10,351 | $13,429 | $3,078 |
- 0.52%NLR, cheaper
- 0.69%URA
- Middle half of Uranium & Nuclear funds
- Median 0.75%
NLR cheapest of 9 funds
URA 3rd cheapest of 9 funds
NLR vs URA Dividends
- NLR 3.45%
- URA 6.18%, better
- NLR $3.17
- URA $2.08
- NLR $3.17
- URA $2.08
- NLR Dec 22, 2025
- URA Dec 30, 2025
- NLR Dec 26, 2025
- URA Jan 7, 2026
- NLR Annual
- URA Annual
Distribution history
NLR vs URA Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- NLR
- URA
Risk facts
- Volatility
- NLR 35.9%, betterURA 43.9%
- Return per unit of risk
- NLR 0.37URA 0.38, better
- Worst fall
- NLR −45.0%, betterURA −45.4%
- Market sensitivity
- NLR 1.07URA 1.41
NLR and URA in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.52% · 0.65%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.65%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.52% · 0.70%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.70%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.52% · 0.85%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.85%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.




