Do NLR and SIL hold the same stocks?

By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.

Which is more different from the S&P 500, NLR or SIL?

NLR has 15% of its weight in S&P 500 names and SIL has 0%, so SIL differs more from the index.

Which is cheaper, NLR or SIL?

NLR charges 0.52% a year and SIL charges 0.65%, so NLR is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

Thematic ETFs

NLR vs SIL: Holdings Overlap & Returns

Share on X Download as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, NLR returned −35.8% to SIL's +18.3%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about NLR and SIL

Net assets: $3.1bn on Oct 26, 2026 for VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF, and $4.4bn on Oct 12, 2026 for Global X Silver Miners ETF.

NLR on its own →SIL on its own →

At a glance

15.1%

NLR in the S&P 500

0.0%

SIL in the S&P 500

−35.8%

NLR total return, 1 year

+18.3%

SIL total return, 1 year

NLR · 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 85% of its weight is outside the S&P 500

15% of NLR's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 85% is outside the index. Holdings as of Jun 30, 2026.

SIL · 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 100% of its weight is outside the S&P 500

0% of SIL's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 100% is outside the index. Holdings as of Jul 31, 2026.

Pair scorecard

NLR costs 0.13 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 54.1 points; SIL is 1.3 times larger.

Points (pts) are percentage points.

NLR vs SIL: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Measure	NLR	SIL
Return
Measure	NLR	SIL
Total return, 1 year	−35.8%	+18.3%
Drawdown
Measure	NLR	SIL
Below its all-time high	41.6%, high on Jan 28, 2026	34.2%, high on Feb 27, 2026
Against its benchmark
Measure	NLR	SIL
What it tracks	Nuclear and uranium	Silver miners
Its benchmark, total return, 1 year	+13.4%	+13.4%
Against its benchmark, 1 year	behind by 49.2 pts	ahead by 4.9 pts
Cost and size
Measure	NLR	SIL
Expense ratio	0.52%	0.65%
Net assets, as of Oct 12, 2026	$3.4bn	$4.4bn
Holdings
Measure	NLR	SIL
Holdings in common	0%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026. Method

Risk and return

Apr 30, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026 · 860 weekly returns · each against ACWI

NLR SIL

Return

Total return edge NLR +135.6% +93.6%

Annualized edge NLR +5.3% +4.1%

Price return edge SIL +35.3% +62.4%

Risk

Volatility edge NLR 22.5% 39.9%

Max drawdown edge NLR −45.9% −82.3%

Downside capture 94.9% 100.9%

Beta 0.96 1.03

Risk-adjusted

Sharpe edge NLR (slight) 0.27 0.26

Sortino edge NLR (slight) 0.39 0.38

Treynor 0.064 0.101

Calmar edge NLR 0.12 0.05

Against the benchmark

Alpha −3.0% a year +0.6% a year

Alpha t-stat −0.74 0.07

Information ratio −0.21 0.03

Tracking error 16.3% 36.2%

Reading

NLR returned more: +135.6% to +93.6%. NLR swung less: 22.5% to 39.9%. NLR fell less at its worst: −45.9% to −82.3%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓

Risk and return: NLR vs SIL: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Measure	NLR	SIL	ACWI	Edge	How it is measured
Return
Total return	+135.6%	+93.6%		NLR	Price change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized	+5.3%	+4.1%		NLR	Total return as a yearly rate.
Price return	+35.3%	+62.4%		SIL	Price change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility	22.5%	39.9%		NLR	Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation	15.8%	27.5%		NLR	Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown	−45.9%	−82.3%		NLR	Deepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture	78.3%	84.6%	100.0%	SIL (slight)	Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture	94.9%	100.9%	100.0%	NLR (slight)	Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta	0.96	1.03	1.00	NLR lower	How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared	0.48	0.18	1.00	Not an edge	Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe	0.27	0.26		NLR (slight)	Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino	0.39	0.38		NLR (slight)	Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor	0.064	0.101	0.095	SIL	Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar	0.12	0.05		NLR	Annualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
Benchmark	ACWI	ACWI	ACWI		The ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha	−3.0% a year	+0.6% a year	0.0%	Not significant	Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat	−0.74	0.07		Not an edge	How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range	−10.9% to +4.9%	−16.9% to +18.2%		Both include zero	The 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio	−0.21	0.03		SIL	Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error	16.3%	36.2%	0.0%	Not an edge	How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized.

Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 860 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

By the books each fund has filed, NLR and SIL hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.

50%

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first NLR SIL

Only in one fund ↓

Only in NLR

Cameco Corp 8.41%

Constellation Energy Corp 8.04%

Public Service Enterprise Group Inc 7.09%

BWX Technologies Inc 6.78%

Fortum Oyj 5.75%

Oklo Inc 5.22%

Centrus Energy Corp 5.05%

Uranium Energy Corp 4.99%

Only in SIL

Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. 22.38%

Pan American Silver Corp. 12.54%

COEUR MINING, INC. 10.59%

INDUSTRIAS PENOLES, S.A.B. DE C.V. 5.21%

HECLA MINING COMPANY 4.63%

FIRST MAJESTIC SILVER CORP. 4.47%

FRESNILLO PLC 4.30%

Compania de Minas Buenaventura S.A.A. 4.18%

Check overlap with more funds →

Window by window

Window by window: NLR vs SIL: Holdings Overlap & Returns
	Total return		vs its benchmark
Window	NLR	SIL	NLR	SIL
3 months	−6.5%	+6.3%	−10.9 pts vs ACWI	+1.9 pts vs ACWI
6 months	−30.2%	−10.2%	−37.6 pts vs ACWI	−17.6 pts vs ACWI
1 year	−35.8%	+18.3%	−49.2 pts vs ACWI	+4.9 pts vs ACWI
3 years	+54.0%	+227.9%	−34.9 pts vs ACWI	+139.0 pts vs ACWI
Since launchNot the same days: NLR Aug 2007 · SIL Apr 2010	+66.1%	+109.0%	not measured	−286.2 pts vs ACWI

Open this comparison in the app →

Side by side

NLR VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF · Holds 25 stocks in nuclear and uranium, 15% of its weight in S&P 500 companies SIL Global X Silver Miners ETF · Holds 39 stocks in silver miners, 0% of its weight in S&P 500 companies

Issuer VanEck Global X

Theme Nuclear and uranium Silver miners

In the S&P 500 15.1% 0.0%

Active share vs the S&P 500 99.8% 100.0%

In the Nasdaq-100 8.0% 0.0%

Holdings 25 39

Top ten, share of the fund 61.1% 76.3%

Expense ratio 0.52% 0.65%

Fee for the differing part 0.52% 0.65%

Total return, 1 year −35.8% +18.3%

vs its benchmark −49.2 pts vs ACWI +4.9 pts vs ACWI

Below its high −41.6% −34.2%

Net assets, NLR as of Oct 26, 2026 and SIL as of Oct 12, 2026 $3.1bn $4.4bn

As of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.

Client brief · page 1 of 2 Report BR-24F8EF6271

NLR and SIL are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?

Theme. NLR covers Nuclear and uranium and SIL covers Silver miners.
Concentration. The top ten holdings are 61.1% of NLR and 76.3% of SIL, a gap of 15.2 points.
What each follows. NLR follows Nuclear and uranium and SIL follows Silver miners.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Your saved page · Privacy.

Alert

About each fund

NLR

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 Oct 28, 2026 the fund returned −35.8% with distributions reinvested against +13.4% for its benchmark, the MSCI ACWI Index, so a holder was behind by 49.2 pts. It sits 41.6% below its all-time high of Jan 28, 2026.

SIL

By weight, 0% of SIL'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 76% of the fund across 39 positions, as filed for Jul 31, 2026. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 the fund returned +18.3% with distributions reinvested against +13.4% for its benchmark, the MSCI ACWI Index, so a holder was ahead by 4.9 pts. It sits 34.2% below its all-time high of Feb 27, 2026.

Questions people ask

Do NLR and SIL hold the same stocks?: By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
Which is more different from the S&P 500, NLR or SIL?: NLR has 15% of its weight in S&P 500 names and SIL has 0%, so SIL differs more from the index.
Which is cheaper, NLR or SIL?: NLR charges 0.52% a year and SIL charges 0.65%, so NLR is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

NLR vs ARTY NLR vs XME NLR vs QTUM NLR vs BOTZ SIL vs URA SIL vs SILJ SIL vs AIRR SIL vs SLVP

Where to next

All thematic ETFs ranked by the S&P 500 Difference Score →How the scores are computed →NLR on its own →SIL on its own →NLR dividend history →NLR holdings →SIL dividend history →SIL holdings →Method →Standards and sources →

Sources and dates

NLR filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

NLR prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

VanEck website ↗

SIL filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

SIL prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

Global X page for SIL ↗

Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.

How this is computed

Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.

Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, NLR against SIL, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/nlr-vs-sil

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.