Screener
URA vs NANR
Global X Uranium ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P North American Natural Resources ETF
Key differences
- NANR costs 0.34% less per year.
- URA is significantly larger than NANR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- URA is classified as equity, while NANR is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- Over the last 3 years, URA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- URA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| URA | NANR | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.69% | 0.35% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $7.8B | $795M |
| Since | 2010 | 2015 |
| Dividend yield | 3.75% | 1.45% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +65.1% | +53.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | +41.8% | +19.1% |
| CAGR 5Y | +23.3% | +16.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.96 | 0.81 |
| Volatility 1Y | 49.70% | 18.21% |
| Max drawdown | -61.45% | -49.15% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to URA and NANR
Explore further