Key Points
Vanguard Energy ETF provides broad, low-cost exposure to traditional fossil fuels, while VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF targets a niche utility and mining theme.
VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF offers a higher trailing dividend yield but has faced significantly deeper drawdowns over the past five years.
Vanguard Energy ETF is more diversified with 111 holdings, whereas the VanEck fund concentrates its assets in just 29 nuclear-related companies.
The VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF (NYSEMKT:NLR) provides concentrated exposure to the nuclear fuel cycle with a higher yield, whereas the Vanguard Energy ETF (NYSEMKT:VDE) offers broad, low-cost access to traditional oil and gas.
Energy investors often choose between broad sector coverage and specific thematic plays. While VDE tracks the entire U.S. energy market from oil majors to equipment providers, NLR focuses specifically on the nuclear power ecosystem, including uranium miners and utilities. This comparison highlights how these distinct strategies impact costs, income potential, and price stability.
Snapshot (cost & size)
| Metric | VDE | NLR |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Vanguard | VanEck |
| Share price | $187.38 (as of 2026-11-02) | $89.65 (as of 2026-11-02) |
| Expense ratio | 0.09% | 0.52% |
| 1-yr return (as of 2026-11-02) | 54.6% | (40.8%) |
| Dividend yield | 2.2% | 3.5% |
| Beta | 0.47 | 0.91 |
| AUM | $10.4B | $3.0B |
Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500; beta is calculated from monthly returns over the available fund history (up to five years). The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months. Dividend yield is the trailing-12-month distribution yield as of the close of the trading day on Nov.2, 2026.
The Vanguard fund is significantly more affordable, with an expense ratio of 0.09% compared to 0.52% for the VanEck fund. However, income-focused investors may find the VanEck fund more appealing due to its higher 3.5% trailing dividend payout.
Performance & risk comparison
| Metric | VDE | NLR |
|---|---|---|
| Max drawdown (5 yr) | (26.6%) | (45.5%) |
| Growth of $1,000 over 5 years (total return) | $2,733 | $1,779 |
What's inside
The VanEck fund provides a narrow window into the nuclear sector, holding 29 positions across the utility, energy, and industrial sectors. Its largest positions include Public Service Enterprise Group (NYSE:PEG) at 9.5%, Constellation Energy (NASDAQ:CEG) at 9.5%, and Cameco (NYSE:CCJ) at 8.1%. By tracking its target indexes, the fund offers exposure to the full nuclear fuel cycle, including mining and power generation. This strategy results in a portfolio in which energy stocks account for 47% of the weight, while utilities and industrials account for 37% and 17%, respectively. The fund was launched in 2007. VanEck Uranium and Nuclear ETF has paid $3.17 per share over the trailing 12 months, which on its recent ~$89.65 share price works out to a 3.5% yield.
The Vanguard fund offers much broader exposure, holding 111 stocks that cover the full spectrum of the U.S. energy industry. Its largest positions include ExxonMobil Holdings (NYSE:XOM) at 22.9%, Chevron Corp. (NYSE:CVX) at 14.4%, and ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP) at 5.9%. By using a full replication technique to track the MSCI U.S. Investable Market Index (IMI)/Energy 25/50, the fund captures large-, mid-, and small-cap companies across the domestic market. Unlike the VanEck fund, the Vanguard portfolio is 100% concentrated in the energy sector, omitting the utility and industrial diversification found in the nuclear-focused fund. It was launched in 2004. Vanguard Energy ETF has paid $4.08 per share over the trailing 12 months, which on its recent ~$187.38 share price works out to a 2.2% yield.
For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.
Which looks like the better buy?
A few years ago, U.S. energy demand flattened due to advances in efficiency efforts across the grid. That has gone out the window as AI data center proliferation has begun to spike energy demand once again. That bodes well for both energy ETFs. Yet, there are crucial differences between these two funds that investors should take into consideration.
The macro case for the VanEck nuclear-focused fund, NLR, sounds compelling: the dual needs of meeting increased energy demand for data centers and the imperative of the world to address global warming through emissions-free energy sources like nuclear power plants should be a boon for nuclear companies. On top of that, the federal government under President Biden started fast-tracking efforts to develop smaller, simpler nuclear reactor designs. Designs making their way to market include modular reactors that can be used to supply remote towns and military bases with clean energy, rather than relying on a complex supply chain to import oil and diesel fuels.
The nuclear fund, NLR, has an interesting diversification in its holdings, with 47% of assets invested in U.S. equities, 39% in non-U.S. developed markets, and the balance, 14%, in emerging markets. The U.S. and Canada combined make up more than half of the countries the fund is invested in.
Interestingly, too, is that NLR is not heavily invested in large-cap stocks, with just 28% of assets in large caps. Most of the assets are dedicated to small-cap stocks, 38% of the portfolio, which promise better long-term returns but bring more risk. NLR is heavily invested in its top 10, with that cohort representing a significant 67% of investments by the fund. That does bring some concentration risk.
The Vanguard energy fund, VDE, is a U.S.-focused energy fund in practice, with every stock in the portfolio a U.S. listed company. That's not a bad thing, necessarily, given the country's well-developed energy industry and leadership.
Some 56% of its assets are in large-cap stocks, all of which are considered value stocks. About 32% of assets are in mid caps, mostly value equities, too, and the balance of 13% is in small caps, also skewed toward value. Due to rounding, the figures add up to more than 100%.
Interestingly, VDE is heavily concentrated in its top 10 holdings. They account for more than two-thirds of its investments.
So which energy fund to choose? Let performance be your guide.
NLR has returned to its investors annualized returns of 13%, 13%, and 10% over the 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year periods, respectively.
VDE has rewarded its shareholders with 21%, 23%, and 11% annualized returns over the most recent three-year, five-year, and 10-year time periods, respectively.
In this case, the broader, more fossil-fuel-focused ETF from Vanguard, VDE, is the winner based on performance alone.
Brendan Coffey has positions in Vanguard World Fund - Vanguard Energy ETF. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Cameco, Chevron, and Constellation Energy. The Motley Fool recommends ConocoPhillips. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.