Data as of . Every figure is the themes desk's own, on published data.
ICLN vs NLR
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, ICLN and NLR hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ICLN | Only in NLR |
|---|---|
| BLOOM ENERGY CORPORATION 13.79% | Cameco Corp 8.39% |
| NEXTPOWER INC. 7.31% | Constellation Energy Corp 8.03% |
| FIRST SOLAR, INC. 7.18% | Public Service Enterprise Group Inc 7.08% |
| China Yangtze Power Co., Ltd. 5.92% | BWX Technologies Inc 6.77% |
| VESTAS WIND SYSTEMS A/S 3.38% | Fortum Oyj 5.74% |
| PLUG POWER INC. 3.29% | Oklo Inc 5.21% |
| ENPHASE ENERGY, INC. 3.26% | Centrus Energy Corp 5.04% |
| EQUATORIAL S.A. 2.90% | Uranium Energy Corp 4.99% |
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 Jun 30, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICLN | NLR | ICLN | NLR | ICLN | NLR | |
| 3 months | −16.4% | −1.8% | −21.1 pts | −6.5 pts | −18.5 pts | −3.9 pts |
| 6 months | +2.2% | −11.8% | −12.9 pts | −27.0 pts | −17.9 pts | −32.0 pts |
| 1 year | +25.3% | +4.0% | +5.3 pts | −16.0 pts | −0.3 pts | −21.6 pts |
| 3 years | +17.5% | +95.8% | −60.4 pts | +17.9 pts | −75.9 pts | +2.4 pts |
| Since launch | +10.6% | +200.2% | −800.8 pts | −611.2 pts | −1673.5 pts | −1483.9 pts |
| ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | iShares | VanEck |
| Theme | Clean energy | Nuclear and uranium |
| In the S&P 500 | 7.2% | 15.1% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 100.0% | 99.8% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 0.0% | 8.0% |
| Holdings | 122 | 25 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 51.8% | 61.0% |
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.52% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.38% | 0.52% |
| Total return, 1 year | +25.3% | +4.0% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +5.3 pts | −16.0 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | −0.3 pts | −21.6 pts |
| Below its high | −42.8% | −27.0% |
ICLN in plain words
By weight, 7% of ICLN'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 52% of the fund across 122 positions, as filed for Apr 30, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +25.3% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 5.3 pts. It sits 42.8% below its all-time high of Jan 7, 2021.
NLR in plain words
By weight, 15% of NLR'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 61% of the fund across 25 positions, as filed for Jun 30, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +4.0% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 16.0 pts. It sits 27.0% below its all-time high of Jan 28, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Do ICLN and NLR 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, ICLN or NLR?
- ICLN has 7% of its weight in S&P 500 names and NLR has 15%, so ICLN differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, ICLN or NLR?
- ICLN charges 0.38% a year and NLR charges 0.52%, so ICLN 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, ICLN against NLR, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/ICLN-NLR.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.