Peer Group
| # | Name | Ticker | AUM |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Global X Uranium ETF | URA | $5.6B |
| 2 | VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | NLR | $3.5B |
| 3 | Sprott Uranium Miners ETF | URNM | $1.8B |
| 4 | Range Nuclear Renaissance Index ETF | NUKZ | $687M |
| 5 | Sprott Junior Uranium Miners ETF | URNJ | $310M |
| 6 | First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF | RCTR | $29M |
| 7 | Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF | URAN | $24M |
| 8 | Nicholas Nuclear Income ETF | NUKX | $8M |
| 9 | Tortoise Nuclear Renaissance ETF | TNUK | $1M |
| Name | Cumulative Return | Ann. Return | Ann. Vol | Sharpe | Max DD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Group | -17.9% | -17.9% | 41.7% | -0.52 | -33.6% |
Peer composites equal-weight the group's share-class representatives' daily returns, including delisted members' alive-era history via the frozen year-end snapshots — though our coverage of closed funds is partial, so composite levels at older dates may run slightly high. Membership is the latest known — style migrators carry their full history. ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 10/7/2025 to 10/7/2026.
Name | YTD | 1D | 5D | 1M | 3M | 6M | 1Y | 2Y | 3Y | 5Y | MAX |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Group | -9.3% | -3.3% | 2.1% | -11.3% | -5.2% | -16.0% | -17.9% | 13.4% | 18.6% | 15.7% | 0.9% |
ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.
Name | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | YTD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Peer Group | -0.8%* | -44.8% | 17.4% | 21.4% | -48.0% | -10.7% | -3.5% | -6.5% | -27.3% | 8.0% | 22.9% | -11.8% | -0.9% | 36.4% | 49.2% | -4.5% | 44.6% | 10.2% | 52.1% | -9.3% |
* partial year — the series ran for only part of it (its first year, or the year it closed); the figure is the return over the part it did run. ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.
Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.
Name | Ann. α | β MKT | β SMB | β HML | β RMW | β CMA | β UMD | β iHML | R² | Obs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Global Dev Peer Group | -7.2% | 1.56** | 0.29 | 0.18 | -1.17** | -0.86* | -0.18 | -1.36** | 0.67 | 226 |
ETF performance based on market prices. Global Dev factor set. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth). Fama-French publishes daily factors for developed markets only, so Dev Ex-US is developed markets excluding the US and Global Dev is developed markets including it; emerging markets, a small share of world market capitalization, are not covered by the source data. From 10/7/2025 to 8/31/2026.
Sector - Nuclear Energy Composite
No metrics selected — use Add metric to chart factors over time.
Every figure on this card is an equal-weight aggregate over the composite's share-class-deduped members: the median across the members reporting each field, blank where too few of them do. Three rows depart from that, because a median of them would say nothing: Inception is the group's OLDEST member — where its combined history can start; 3Y Flow is the group's own net flow over its own assets, not the middle member's rate; and Type, Asset Class and Region are compositions by member count. Holdings is the merged look-through book — distinct positions across the members' holdings.
Equity size and style definitions: Large vs. Small based on market cap, where Large > $70B, Mid $10-70B, and Small < $10B. Value vs. Growth based on percentile ranking on Traditional Value score within the fund's region and size cohort (equal thirds among its true equity-fund peers). Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box, from stock-level classification (size on the same $70B/$10B lines; value by Traditional Value terciles across scored stocks). The dot is the average holding ranked against other funds, so dot and weights can differ at the margin. The Size and Style bars are the grid's row and column totals. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.
Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Ranked within the clean equity fund universe, one entry per fund series (lowest: 0, highest: 100; the middle of the range is denser than the ends). Blue dots mark the fund's universe-normalized score; percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.
Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.
Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. Holdings that are themselves funds are looked through one level to their own mix (2% of the book). Cash & Short-Term includes 1.0% of net assets the filing does not itemise. The short book is stated under the card and never netted into a slice: a pie cannot draw a negative, and folding a hedge into the class it offsets would make it look like more of that class. Other is everything we could not name as an asset class: holdings the filing itself labels as other, derivative positions at the market value the filing reports rather than at notional, and funds held inside this fund whose own holdings we could not read.
9 funds
| # | Name | Ticker | Weight % | AUM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Global X Uranium ETF | URA | 11.11 | $5.6B |
| 2 | VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | NLR | 11.11 | $3.5B |
| 3 | Sprott Uranium Miners ETF | URNM | 11.11 | $1.8B |
| 4 | Range Nuclear Renaissance Index ETF | NUKZ | 11.11 | $687M |
| 5 | Sprott Junior Uranium Miners ETF | URNJ | 11.11 | $310M |
| 6 | First Trust Bloomberg Nuclear Power ETF | RCTR | 11.11 | $29M |
| 7 | Themes Uranium & Nuclear ETF | URAN | 11.11 | $24M |
| 8 | Nicholas Nuclear Income ETF | NUKX | 11.11 | $8M |
| 9 | Tortoise Nuclear Renaissance ETF | TNUK | 11.11 | $1M |
The funds this composite is made of, each counting once (100 ÷ 9 — the same equal weighting behind its returns and its median exposures), listed largest first by assets. Tick Look-Through to expand them into the stocks they hold. Holdings Concentration beside this card always describes that looked-through book, not this list — it is a statement about exposure, not about the roster. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.
Hover or click for definitions. Solid blue dots mark the fund: percentage rows on a 0–100% scale, holdings counts log-scaled across the clean-universe 5th–95th percentile range; percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Every row on this card describes the composite's merged look-through book — the stocks its members hold — not the list of member funds, whatever the Holdings card is showing.
Metric | Sector - Nuclear Energy Composite 9 funds | Peer Asset Class 5,640 funds |
|---|---|---|
YTD Return | -12.79% | 11.63%2 |
1Y Return | -19.36% | 14.46%1 |
3Y Return (Ann.) | 11.68% | - |
5Y Return (Ann.) | - | - |
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper | 0.75% | 0.74%47 |
Sector - Nuclear Energy Composite is a Sparkline peer composite — its members are the share-class representatives of the funds in the group (one class per fund: the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class). This card ranks it against its asset class, Equity, which is the only pool a composite has: there is no peer group of peer groups, and the region tier is a fund-level grouping. Typical Member rows are medians across those representatives — the value is the group’s median, and the percentile is the median of the members’ own ranks within Equity, so both describe the middle fund rather than the group as a whole. Quartile chips fill the layer the rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). A dash is a window the group is younger than, or one too few Equity funds have a history for to rank against — hover it for which.