Data as of . Every figure is the themes desk's own, on published data.
CIBR vs URA
0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, CIBR and URA hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in CIBR | Only in URA |
|---|---|
| Palo Alto Networks, Inc. 8.92% | CAMECO CORPORATION 23.14% |
| CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (Class A) 8.79% | Oklo Inc 7.31% |
| Fortinet, Inc. 8.54% | NEXGEN ENERGY LTD. 6.27% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. 6.84% | URANIUM ENERGY CORP. 5.79% |
| Broadcom Inc. 6.04% | Joint stock company National atomic comp 4.81% |
| Cloudflare, Inc. (Class A) 4.35% | Sprott Physical Uranium Trust 4.33% |
| Okta, Inc. 4.17% | ENERGY FUELS INCORPORATED 4.24% |
| Zscaler, Inc. 3.47% | DAEWOO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO., L 4.07% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings as filed for Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 4, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIBR | URA | CIBR | URA | CIBR | URA | |
| 3 months | +9.2% | +1.7% | +4.5 pts | −3.0 pts | +7.1 pts | −0.4 pts |
| 6 months | +43.7% | −5.6% | +28.5 pts | −20.7 pts | +23.5 pts | −25.7 pts |
| 1 year | +31.4% | +19.6% | +11.5 pts | −0.4 pts | +5.9 pts | −6.0 pts |
| 3 years | +102.4% | +112.1% | +24.5 pts | +34.1 pts | +8.9 pts | +18.6 pts |
| Since launch | +402.1% | −30.8% | +57.6 pts | −760.5 pts | −220.6 pts | −1465.7 pts |
| CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | URA Global X Uranium ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | First Trust | Global X |
| Theme | Cybersecurity | Nuclear and uranium |
| In the S&P 500 | 61.9% | 0.0% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 90.7% | 100.0% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 47.9% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 43 | 52 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 56.9% | 66.1% |
| Expense ratio | 0.58% | 0.69% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.64% | 0.69% |
| Total return, 1 year | +31.4% | +19.6% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +11.5 pts | −0.4 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | +5.9 pts | −6.0 pts |
| Below its high | −7.5% | −47.6% |
CIBR in plain words
By weight, 62% of CIBR's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 91%. The top ten holdings are 57% of the fund across 43 positions, as filed for Sep 3, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +31.4% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 11.5 pts. It sits 7.5% below its all-time high of Aug 13, 2026.
URA in plain words
By weight, 0% of URA's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 66% of the fund across 52 positions, as filed for Apr 30, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +19.6% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was about even. It sits 47.6% below its all-time high of Feb 2, 2011.
Questions people ask
- Do CIBR and URA hold the same stocks?
- By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight, which is mostly different names. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, CIBR or URA?
- CIBR has 62% of its weight in S&P 500 names and URA has 0%, so URA differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, CIBR or URA?
- CIBR charges 0.58% a year and URA charges 0.69%, so CIBR is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, CIBR against URA, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/CIBR-URA.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.