Screener
HAP vs URA
VanEck Natural Resources ETF vs Global X Uranium ETF
Key differences
- HAP costs 0.28% less per year.
- URA is significantly larger than HAP — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, URA has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| HAP | URA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.41% | 0.69% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $316M | $7.8B |
| Since | 2008 | 2010 |
| Dividend yield | 1.86% | 3.75% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +46.5% | +65.1% |
| CAGR 3Y | +18.1% | +41.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | +11.8% | +23.3% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.91 | 0.96 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.90% | 49.70% |
| Max drawdown | -44.14% | -61.45% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to HAP and URA
Explore further