If you're looking to invest in uranium ETFs tied to nuclear energy, URA and URNM are two top options. While both offer access to the uranium market, they cater to different investment goals:
- URA: Broader exposure across the nuclear fuel cycle, including mining, refining, and reactor equipment production. It has a lower expense ratio (0.69%) and historically stronger returns, with a 69.08% year-to-date return as of Nov 2025.
- URNM: Focused on uranium mining and physical uranium holdings. It’s more concentrated, with higher exposure to uranium price fluctuations, and an expense ratio of 0.75%.
Quick Comparison
| Metric | URA | URNM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.75% |
| Year-to-Date Return | 69.08% | 37.91% |
| 1-Year Return | 46.29% | 20.42% |
| 5-Year Return | 34.76% | 33.98% |
| Holdings | 50 companies | 34 companies |
| Focus | Broad nuclear cycle | Uranium mining |
If you want diversified exposure with moderate risk, URA is a better fit. For concentrated mining exposure, URNM may suit more active, risk-tolerant investors. Both can complement a portfolio, but consider limiting allocation to 5%-10% due to sector volatility.
Global X Uranium ETF (URA)
Fund Structure and Holdings
The Global X Uranium ETF (URA) focuses on companies involved in uranium mining, refining, and the production of nuclear equipment. With $5.0 billion in assets under management (AUM) and a portfolio of 50 companies, it offers investors a broad range of exposure across the uranium industry. This diversified portfolio allows investors to tap into uranium's market fundamentals while navigating broader economic trends. The fund's allocation strategy provides further insight into its investment approach.
One key feature of URA is its substantial allocation to the Sprott Physical Uranium Trust (SPUT). The ETF's top 10 holdings make up nearly two-thirds of its total portfolio. Cameco Corporation leads as the largest single holding, accounting for 23.19% of assets. Other major holdings include Oklo Inc. Class A (11.62%), Uranium Energy Corp. (6.16%), NexGen Energy Ltd. (4.99%), and Centrus Energy Corp. Class A (4.46%).
In terms of geographic distribution, URA emphasizes international markets, with significant investments in companies based in Canada, the United States, South Korea, and Australia.
Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM)
Fund Structure and Holdings
The Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM) is designed to follow the North Shore Global Uranium Mining Index, concentrating its investments in 34 holdings. This targeted strategy prioritizes companies where at least 50% of their assets are tied to uranium-related activities such as mining, exploration, development, production, or holding physical uranium. Notably, the fund's three largest holdings make up about 45.5% of the portfolio, emphasizing its uranium-centric approach.
The ETF’s sector allocation highlights its dedication to uranium. A significant 87.74% of the portfolio falls under Non-Energy Minerals, with the remaining 12.29% linked to the Miscellaneous sector, largely due to its stake in the Sprott Physical Uranium Trust. This focused sector strategy is balanced by a geographically diverse investment spread.
From a geographical perspective, URNM invests in major uranium-producing regions. Canada leads with 46.2% of the allocation, followed by Kazakhstan at 16.38%, Australia at 14.33%, and the United States at 14.05%. This regional distribution plays a significant role in shaping the ETF’s risk and volatility.
Performance and Risk
Due to its concentrated structure, URNM's performance is closely tied to its top holdings. As a specialized uranium mining ETF, its returns are heavily influenced by fluctuations in uranium prices, making it particularly sensitive to market shifts.
URA vs. URNM: Side-by-Side Comparison
Comparison Table
When comparing URA and URNM, the differences across key metrics become clear. Both ETFs provide exposure to the nuclear energy sector, but their performance and costs vary.
| Metric | URA | URNM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.75% |
| Annual Cost per $10,000 | $69 | $75 |
| Year-to-Date Return | 69.08% | 37.91% |
| 1-Year Return | 46.29% | 20.42% |
| 3-Year Annualized Return | 34.28% | 22.51% |
| 5-Year Annualized Return | 34.76% | 33.98% |
| 10-Year Annualized Return | 15.91% | N/A (launched Dec 2019) |
As of November 29, 2025, URA has consistently delivered stronger returns over most timeframes. The year-to-date performance alone shows a gap of over 31 percentage points in favor of URA. Similarly, URA leads in one-year and three-year returns, while the five-year figures are nearly identical.
When it comes to costs, URA’s expense ratio of 0.69% is slightly lower than URNM’s 0.75%, translating to $69 annually per $10,000 invested for URA compared to $75 for URNM. These differences, though small, can add up over time. While these numbers provide valuable insight, understanding each ETF’s risk profile is equally important for a well-rounded evaluation.
Risk-Adjusted Returns
Looking beyond raw performance, it’s essential to consider how effectively these ETFs balance risk and reward. URA demonstrates stronger risk-adjusted returns, as reflected in metrics like the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin ratios. This means URA tends to deliver more return relative to the risk taken.
However, this advantage comes with a tradeoff. Since its inception, URA has experienced a significantly larger maximum drawdown compared to URNM. In periods of major market downturns, URA investors have faced steeper losses. On the other hand, both ETFs show similar levels of daily volatility, suggesting that their short-term price fluctuations are comparable.
sbb-itb-e429e5c
ETF Battles: Uranium ETFs are SIZZLING! Which is the TOP CHOICE?
Which ETF Fits Your Investment Goals
Choosing between URA and URNM comes down to your investment strategy and how much risk you're comfortable taking. Both ETFs provide access to the nuclear energy sector, but they cater to different investment approaches and risk levels. Here's a closer look at which ETF might align with your goals.
For Broader Industry Exposure
If you're looking for exposure across the entire nuclear fuel cycle, URA might be the better fit. This ETF takes a diversified approach, covering everything from uranium mining to processing and enrichment. Such a wide scope can help balance out the impact of weaker performance in any one segment of the industry. URA is often recognized for its steady performance across market cycles and its balanced cost structure.
For Targeted Mining Exposure
Investors seeking a more concentrated bet on uranium mining should consider URNM. This ETF zeroes in on companies directly involved in uranium extraction, giving you focused exposure to mining operations. However, this narrower scope means less diversification, which could make the fund more sensitive to changes in uranium prices and mining activity. URNM is better suited for investors who actively track the uranium market and have a solid understanding of mining economics.
For Those Cautious About Risk
Both URA and URNM come with market volatility, so if you're risk-averse, it's wise to limit your exposure. Allocating only 5% to 10% of your portfolio to these funds can help manage risk. A longer investment horizon is key to weathering short-term market swings, and using strategies like dollar-cost averaging can help you manage entry points more effectively over time.
Conclusion
URA and URNM both offer compelling ways to invest in the nuclear energy sector, but they cater to different investment strategies. URA stands out as the go-to choice for most investors thanks to its diversified exposure across the entire nuclear fuel cycle, from mining to enrichment and processing. This broad diversification helps reduce the impact of underperformance in specific areas, and its lower expense ratio allows you to retain more of your returns over time. Additionally, URA's risk-adjusted performance often makes it a strong option for those looking to build long-term uranium positions.
On the other hand, URNM serves a more specialized purpose for investors seeking concentrated exposure to uranium mining companies. If you're confident in analyzing uranium price trends and have a solid understanding of the mining sector, URNM's focused strategy can deliver substantial gains during periods of strong mining performance. However, this focus also brings increased volatility and less protection during downturns.
Ultimately, choosing between these ETFs depends on your investment goals, risk tolerance, and how actively you plan to manage your portfolio. For a more passive approach with balanced exposure, URA is a solid fit. If you're willing to take on higher risk for potentially higher rewards, URNM may be worth considering. Allocating a small portion of your portfolio - around 5%-10% - can help you tap into the growth potential of nuclear energy while keeping volatility in check.
FAQs
What sets URA and URNM apart in terms of investment focus and risk levels?
URA takes a broad-based approach, investing in a variety of companies involved in the uranium supply chain. This includes sectors like mining, refining, exploration, and even nuclear component manufacturing. On the other hand, URNM adopts a narrower focus, targeting companies that earn at least 50% of their revenue from uranium-related activities such as mining, exploration, development, and production.
If you're an investor looking for a more balanced exposure to the nuclear energy industry, URA's wider reach might be more appealing. However, if you're aiming for potentially higher returns and are comfortable with greater risk, URNM’s concentrated strategy could be a better fit. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your investment goals and how much risk you're willing to take.
How does the location of holdings influence the performance and risk of URA and URNM?
The geographic spread of investments plays a crucial role in shaping the performance and risk levels of uranium ETFs such as URA and URNM. Countries with robust uranium production, stable political environments, and supportive energy policies often provide steadier returns. On the other hand, exposure to regions facing political or economic challenges can heighten investment risks.
URA and URNM vary in how they allocate assets across countries and companies, influencing their reactions to shifts in global uranium demand and market dynamics. Before selecting an ETF, investors should evaluate how these geographic considerations align with their financial objectives and appetite for risk.
Why might an investor limit uranium ETFs like URA and URNM to 5%-10% of their portfolio?
Investors typically allocate only 5%-10% of their portfolio to uranium ETFs like URA and URNM. This limited exposure is a strategic move to manage risk and maintain a diversified investment mix. The uranium market is known for its volatility, driven by factors such as changing commodity prices, geopolitical uncertainties, and evolving energy policies.
By keeping their investment in uranium-focused ETFs within this range, investors can tap into the growth potential of the nuclear energy sector without exposing their portfolio to undue risk. This balanced approach helps ensure their broader investment strategy stays aligned with their financial goals and risk tolerance.
Related Blog Posts
- How do VPU and XLU compare on dividend yield, dividend growth, fees, and sector concentration?
- VPU vs XLU (utilities): 5-year total return, dividend yield/growth, sector tilt differences.
- GDX vs GDXJ vs RING vs SGDM - Best gold-miner ETF for total return
- VPU vs XLU vs FUTY vs IDU - Best utilities ETF for defensive yield
Table of Contents
Book Free Consultation
Walk through Mezzi with our team, review your current situation, and ask any questions you may have.