ICLN vs URA: returns, risk and drawdowns compared
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF against Global X Uranium ETF, over the same 6 years (July 2020 to October 2026) with dividends reinvested.
Data updated October 2026
From July 2020 to October 2026, ICLN returned 5.7% a year and URA 24.6% a year on average, so URA came out ahead by 18.9% a year. URA was the more volatile of the two (39.2% against 30.7% a year), and the deepest falls from a month-end high were 60.8% for ICLN and 37.0% for URA.
The correlation of monthly returns was 0.45: they moved together only in part. Over 41 rolling 3-year periods, ICLN did better in 0% and URA in 100%.
Side by side
| ICLN | URA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual return (CAGR) | +5.7% | +24.6% |
| Total return | +42% | +302% |
| Annual volatility | 30.7% | 39.2% |
| Maximum drawdown (month-end) | −60.8% | −37.0% |
| Worst month | −14.5% | −17.9% |
| Best month | +20.3% | +30.5% |
| Positive months | 51% | 55% |
| Best year | 2025: +47.0% | 2025: +67.2% |
| Worst year | 2024: −25.7% | 2022: −11.3% |
| 1-year return | +2.0% | −25.4% |
| 5 years, a year | −5.8% | +8.6% |
| 10 years, a year | +8.0% | — |
| Trading currency | USD | USD |
First nine rows: the same 76 months for both funds. Trailing returns: to each fund’s last close.
Growth of 10,000: ICLN vs URA
Returns by calendar year
| Year | ICLN | URA |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | +47.0% | +67.2% |
| 2024 | −25.7% | −0.6% |
| 2023 | −20.4% | +46.3% |
| 2022 | −5.4% | −11.3% |
| 2021 | −24.2% | +57.6% |
How the figures are calculated
Total return in the fund’s trading currency, from end-of-day prices with dividends reinvested on the ex-date. The fund’s own ongoing charges are already reflected in its price; trading costs, taxes and currency conversion are not included. Past returns do not predict future returns.
The comparison uses only the months in which both funds have prices, so the figures cover the same period even when one fund is older.
Questions
Which has returned more, ICLN or URA?
From July 2020 to October 2026, ICLN returned +5.7% a year and URA +24.6% a year, with dividends reinvested. Over rolling 3-year periods ICLN did better in 0% of cases. Past returns do not predict future returns.
Which is riskier, ICLN or URA?
Over the same months annual volatility was 30.7% for ICLN and 39.2% for URA; the deepest fall from a month-end high was 60.8% and 37.0%, and the worst single month −14.5% and −17.9%.
How correlated are ICLN and URA?
The correlation of their monthly returns was 0.45: they moved together only in part. Combining them has historically smoothed the ups and downs of either one alone.
More comparisons
Source: MarketStack end-of-day prices, total return with dividends reinvested. Figures are historical and descriptive; they are not forecasts and not investment advice. MEDGE Capital does not recommend buying or selling any instrument. Risk disclaimer.