Do SIL and URA 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, SIL or URA?

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

Which is cheaper, SIL or URA?

SIL charges 0.65% a year and URA charges 0.69%, so SIL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

Thematic ETFs

SIL vs URA: Holdings Overlap & Returns

Share on X Download as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, SIL returned +18.3% to URA's −30.3%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about SIL and URA

Net assets on Oct 12, 2026: $4.4bn for Global X Silver Miners ETF and $5.4bn for Global X Uranium ETF.

SIL on its own →URA on its own →

At a glance

0.0%

SIL in the S&P 500

0.0%

URA in the S&P 500

+18.3%

SIL total return, 1 year

−30.3%

URA total return, 1 year

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.

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

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

Pair scorecard

SIL costs 0.04 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 48.6 points; URA is 1.2 times larger.

Points (pts) are percentage points.

SIL vs URA: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Measure	SIL	URA
Return
Measure	SIL	URA
Total return, 1 year	+18.3%	−30.3%
Drawdown
Measure	SIL	URA
Below its all-time high	34.2%, high on Feb 27, 2026	58.4%, high on Feb 2, 2011
Against its benchmark
Measure	SIL	URA
What it tracks	Silver miners	Nuclear and uranium
Its benchmark, total return, 1 year	+13.4%	+13.4%
Against its benchmark, 1 year	ahead by 4.9 pts	behind by 43.7 pts
Cost and size
Measure	SIL	URA
Expense ratio	0.65%	0.69%
Net assets, as of Oct 12, 2026	$4.4bn	$5.4bn
Holdings
Measure	SIL	URA
Holdings in common	0%

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

Risk and return

Nov 12, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026 · 832 weekly returns · each against ACWI

SIL URA

Return

Total return edge SIL +27.9% −51.4%

Annualized edge SIL +1.5% −4.4%

Price return edge SIL +7.2% −68.7%

Risk

Volatility edge URA (slight) 39.8% 36.8%

Max drawdown edge SIL −82.3% −93.2%

Downside capture 100.8% 127.6%

Beta 1.01 1.31

Risk-adjusted

Sharpe edge SIL 0.20 0.02

Sortino edge SIL 0.29 0.02

Treynor 0.079 0.005

Calmar edge SIL 0.02 −0.05

Against the benchmark

Alpha −1.6% a year −11.7% a year

Alpha t-stat −0.17 −1.54

Information ratio −0.04 −0.29

Tracking error 36.4% 30.7%

Reading

SIL returned more: +27.9% to −51.4%. URA swung slightly less: 36.8% to 39.8%. SIL fell less at its worst: −82.3% to −93.2%.

Full scorecard

19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓

Risk and return: SIL vs URA: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Measure	SIL	URA	ACWI	Edge	How it is measured
Return
Total return	+27.9%	−51.4%		SIL	Price change plus distributions, reinvested.
Annualized	+1.5%	−4.4%		SIL	Total return as a yearly rate.
Price return	+7.2%	−68.7%		SIL	Price change alone, distributions left out.
Risk
Volatility	39.8%	36.8%		URA (slight)	Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier.
Downside deviation	27.5%	25.0%		URA (slight)	Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate.
Max drawdown	−82.3%	−93.2%		SIL	Deepest fall from a high to the low after it.
Upside capture	77.3%	120.6%	100.0%	URA	Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose.
Downside capture	100.8%	127.6%	100.0%	SIL	Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better.
Beta	1.01	1.31	1.00	SIL lower	How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves.
R squared	0.16	0.32	1.00	Not an edge	Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains.
Risk-adjusted
Sharpe	0.20	0.02		SIL	Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility.
Sortino	0.29	0.02		SIL	Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation.
Treynor	0.079	0.005	0.094	SIL	Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta.
Calmar	0.02	−0.05		SIL	Annualized return divided by the max drawdown.
Against the benchmark
Benchmark	ACWI	ACWI	ACWI		The ETF each fund is measured against.
Alpha	−1.6% a year	−11.7% a year	0.0%	Not significant	Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts.
Alpha t-stat	−0.17	−1.54		Not an edge	How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance.
Alpha range	−19.5% to +16.4%	−26.6% to +3.2%		Both include zero	The 95% range for the yearly alpha.
Information ratio	−0.04	−0.29		SIL	Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error.
Tracking error	36.4%	30.7%	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, 832 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.

What they share

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

50%

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first SIL URA

Only in one fund ↓

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%

Only in URA

CAMECO CORPORATION 22.18%

Sprott Physical Uranium Trust 6.74%

Oklo Inc 6.09%

NEXGEN ENERGY LTD. 6.07%

URANIUM ENERGY CORP. 4.81%

Joint stock company National atomic company Kazatomprom 4.40%

CENTRUS ENERGY CORP. 3.46%

PALADIN ENERGY LTD 3.14%

Check overlap with more funds →

Window by window

Window by window: SIL vs URA: Holdings Overlap & Returns
	Total return		vs its benchmark
Window	SIL	URA	SIL	URA
3 months	+6.3%	−2.6%	+1.9 pts vs ACWI	−7.0 pts vs ACWI
6 months	−10.2%	−30.9%	−17.6 pts vs ACWI	−38.3 pts vs ACWI
1 year	+18.3%	−30.3%	+4.9 pts vs ACWI	−43.7 pts vs ACWI
3 years	+227.9%	+65.5%	+139.0 pts vs ACWI	−23.4 pts vs ACWI
Since launchNot the same days: SIL Apr 2010 · URA Nov 2010	+109.0%	−45.1%	−286.2 pts vs ACWI	−417.4 pts vs ACWI

Open this comparison in the app →

Side by side

SIL Global X Silver Miners ETF · Holds 39 stocks in silver miners, 0% of its weight in S&P 500 companies URA Global X Uranium ETF · Holds 57 stocks in nuclear and uranium, 0% of its weight in S&P 500 companies

Issuer Global X Global X

Theme Silver miners Nuclear and uranium

In the S&P 500 0.0% 0.0%

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

In the Nasdaq-100 0.0% 0.0%

Holdings 39 57

Top ten, share of the fund 76.3% 63.0%

Expense ratio 0.65% 0.69%

Fee for the differing part 0.65% 0.69%

Total return, 1 year +18.3% −30.3%

vs its benchmark +4.9 pts vs ACWI −43.7 pts vs ACWI

Below its high −34.2% −58.4%

Net assets, as of Oct 12, 2026 $4.4bn $5.4bn

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-6C2B353B8C

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

Theme. SIL covers Silver miners and URA covers Nuclear and uranium.
Concentration. The top ten holdings are 76.3% of SIL and 63.0% of URA, a gap of 13.3 points.
What each follows. SIL follows Silver miners and URA follows Nuclear and uranium.

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

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.

URA

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 63% of the fund across 57 positions, as filed for Jul 31, 2026. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 the fund returned −30.3% with distributions reinvested against +13.4% for its benchmark, the MSCI ACWI Index, so a holder was behind by 43.7 pts. It sits 58.4% below its all-time high of Feb 2, 2011.

Questions people ask

Do SIL and URA 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, SIL or URA?: SIL has 0% of its weight in S&P 500 names and URA has 0%, so SIL differs more from the index.
Which is cheaper, SIL or URA?: SIL charges 0.65% a year and URA charges 0.69%, so SIL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.

Other comparisons

SIL vs NLR SIL vs ARKK SIL vs XT SIL vs ARTY URA vs BOTZ URA vs ARKG URA vs CIBR URA vs ARTY

Where to next

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

Sources and dates

SIL and URA filings on SEC EDGAR ↗

SIL and URA prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗

Global X page for SIL ↗

Global X page for URA ↗

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

Open data →

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