URA ranks 4th and TNUK 7th of 9 funds in the Uranium & Nuclear Category.
TNUK vs URA
URA −0.06pt a year
0.75%0.69%
URA 4472.1×the volume
7633.41M
TNUK vs URA Performance
−16.2%−22.9%
- TNUK 0.75%
- URA 0.69%, better
- TNUK $1M
- URA $4.73B
- TNUK
- URA −37.3%
- TNUK
- URA 6.33%
- TNUK 26
- URA 60
- TNUK 763 sh
- URA 3.41M sh, better
- TNUK $20.98
- URA $33.94
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | TNUK | URA |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | C42 | B62Higher |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | B55Higher | D39 |
| Tradability | D27 | B67Higher |
| Holdings | B55Higher | C50 |
| Durability | D33 | A89Higher |
Rank among Uranium & Nuclear funds
Same Category. TNUK and URA are both graded against the same 9 Uranium & Nuclear funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
TNUKC
URAB
In short
TNUK Most nuclear funds stop at the uranium miners. TNUK buys the whole chain: the diggers, the reactor designers and builders, and the crews that operate them, anywhere in the world. A December 2025 arrival priced right at the category midpoint.
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
TNUK The Fund seeks total return by investing in companies across the nuclear energy value chain, including uranium mining and milling, reactor design and construction, and nuclear reactor operation and maintenance.
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
TNUK 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.
TNUK vs URA Cost
Overpaying TNUK vs URA
$1,053
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
TNUK 0.75%
$14,482
URA 0.69%
$13,429
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | TNUK | URA | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,336 | $1,232 | $104 |
| 20 | $5,078 | $4,697 | $381 |
| 30 | $14,482 | $13,429 | $1,053 |
- 0.75%TNUK
- 0.69%URA, cheaper
- Middle half of Uranium & Nuclear funds
- Median 0.75%
URA 3rd cheapest of 9 funds
TNUK 5th cheapest of 9 funds
TNUK vs URA Dividends
- TNUK
- URA 6.33%
- TNUK None
- URA $2.08
- TNUK
- URA $2.08
- TNUK
- URA Dec 30, 2025
- TNUK
- URA Jan 7, 2026
- TNUK
- URA Annual
Distribution history
TNUK vs URA Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- TNUK URA 43.9%
- Return per unit of risk
- TNUK URA 0.38
- Worst fall
- TNUK URA −46.7%
- Market sensitivity
- TNUK 1.06URA 1.41
TNUK and URA in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.75% · 0.52%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.52%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.75% · 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.
- 0.75% · 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.

