Data as of . Every figure is the themes desk's own, on published data.
ICLN 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, ICLN and URA hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ICLN | Only in URA |
|---|---|
| BLOOM ENERGY CORPORATION 13.79% | CAMECO CORPORATION 23.14% |
| NEXTPOWER INC. 7.31% | Oklo Inc 7.31% |
| FIRST SOLAR, INC. 7.18% | NEXGEN ENERGY LTD. 6.27% |
| China Yangtze Power Co., Ltd. 5.92% | URANIUM ENERGY CORP. 5.79% |
| VESTAS WIND SYSTEMS A/S 3.38% | Joint stock company National atomic comp 4.81% |
| PLUG POWER INC. 3.29% | Sprott Physical Uranium Trust 4.33% |
| ENPHASE ENERGY, INC. 3.26% | ENERGY FUELS INCORPORATED 4.24% |
| EQUATORIAL S.A. 2.90% | 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.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICLN | URA | ICLN | URA | ICLN | URA | |
| 3 months | −16.4% | +1.7% | −21.1 pts | −3.0 pts | −18.5 pts | −0.4 pts |
| 6 months | +2.2% | −5.6% | −12.9 pts | −20.7 pts | −17.9 pts | −25.7 pts |
| 1 year | +25.3% | +19.6% | +5.3 pts | −0.4 pts | −0.3 pts | −6.0 pts |
| 3 years | +17.5% | +112.1% | −60.4 pts | +34.1 pts | −75.9 pts | +18.6 pts |
| Since launch | +10.6% | −30.8% | −800.8 pts | −760.5 pts | −1673.5 pts | −1465.7 pts |
| ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | URA Global X Uranium ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | iShares | Global X |
| Theme | Clean energy | Nuclear and uranium |
| In the S&P 500 | 7.2% | 0.0% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 122 | 52 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 51.8% | 66.1% |
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.69% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.38% | 0.69% |
| Total return, 1 year | +25.3% | +19.6% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +5.3 pts | −0.4 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | −0.3 pts | −6.0 pts |
| Below its high | −42.8% | −47.6% |
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.
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 ICLN 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, ICLN or URA?
- ICLN has 7% of its weight in S&P 500 names and URA has 0%, so ICLN differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, ICLN or URA?
- ICLN charges 0.38% a year and URA charges 0.69%, 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 URA, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/ICLN-URA.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.