Screener
URA vs ICLN
Global X Uranium ETF vs iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
Key differences
- ICLN costs 0.30% less per year.
- URA is significantly larger than ICLN — 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
| URA | ICLN | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.69% | 0.39% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $7.8B | $2.5B |
| Since | 2010 | 2008 |
| Dividend yield | 3.75% | 1.30% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | global |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +65.1% | +87.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | +41.8% | +9.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | +23.3% | +2.5% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.96 | 0.34 |
| Volatility 1Y | 49.70% | 25.93% |
| Max drawdown | -61.45% | -66.75% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to URA and ICLN
Explore further