Nuclear Projects Don’t Have to Be Late and Over Budget
For ETF investors, the key takeaway is not just that nuclear projects can succeed — it is that the investable theme is shaped by a long development cycle. A nuclear exposure such as the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index can lean on companies that sit at different points in the value chain, from builders and operators to suppliers with global project ties. That means the fund’s behavior may reflect execution across the industry, not a single reactor milestone.
The concentration risk matters. The source highlights one named constituent, KEPCO, and that is a useful reminder that thematic ETFs can be narrower than they first appear. When an index tracks a highly specialized industry, a small set of companies, technologies, or country linkages can influence results more than broad-market diversification would. Investors should understand whether the basket is tilted toward utilities, engineering firms, or equipment providers before treating it as a clean proxy for “nuclear energy.”
There is also a portfolio-planning question about time horizon. Nuclear infrastructure is built around multi-year planning and multi-decade operation, which makes the theme more comparable to an infrastructure or capital-cycle allocation than a short-term trade. In ETF terms, that can argue for patient sizing and periodic rebalancing rather than reactive buying after headlines about policy support or project approvals.
Finally, investors should separate the business case for nuclear from the implementation risk of the ETF itself. A well-constructed index can capture the industry’s long-run role in reliable low-carbon power, but it cannot remove project execution, regulation, or valuation risk. For long-term portfolios, the question is less whether nuclear matters and more how much exposure belongs in a broader energy transition allocation.
Summary
- While the latest reactors built in the U.S. saw severe delays and cost overruns, the United Arab Emirates saw strong success with its first nuclear plant.
- The strong execution of the Barakah plant in the UAE was attributed to rigorous planning, global collaboration, and thorough budgeting.
- Nuclear power plants are costly and time-intensive to build, but they also generate zero-emission, reliable baseload power for 80 or more years.
The UAE Example
Historically reliant on fossil fuels, the UAE turned to nuclear energy to secure emission-free power to fuel economic growth. Its four-reactor Barakah plant proves that nuclear power projects can be delivered on schedule and on budget. The first unit took eight years from the initial concrete pour to the start of operations, and efficiencies were realized with the subsequent units. For context, Vogtle 3 in the U.S. took 14 years to complete and was roughly seven years behind schedule. Rigorous planning, global collaboration, and thorough budgeting are some of the key elements of the UAE’s approach that contributed to its overall success. Potential project partners were evaluated for a year by a team of 75 nuclear experts from around the world. Ultimately, Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) was chosen to design, build, and support the operations of the Barakah Plant. Nuclear reactors that came online in 2016 and 2019 in South Korea using the same technology (APR 1400) served as reference plants for Barakah. KEPCO is a constituent of the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index (NUKZX).Why do some projects struggle?
Nuclear projects can be challenging, as they’re often first-of-a-kind facilities, deploying a design that has not been used before. This can understandably create difficulties. In practically, the third or fourth version is easier than the first, and later iterations benefit from prior learnings. Regulations can also contribute to delays and cost overruns, with nuclear projects subject to significant oversight. Nuclear development becomes better and more efficient with repetition. Certainly, there are efficiency gains from the first to the second or fourth unit on the same site. More broadly, multiple projects under construction in a country would drive more robust supply chains and a stronger workforce. As the U.S. seeks to triple nuclear power capacity by 2050, these are key areas that need support and have been an emphasis in executive orders from the Trump administration (read more).Nuclear isn’t simple, but has clear advantages.
Admittedly, nuclear power plants are costly and time-intensive to build, but they also generate zero-emission, reliable baseload power for decades. As of April 2025, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission had approved 12 reactors to operate for 80 years, and was reviewing applications from an additional five reactors to extend their licenses to 80 years. Upfront costs are more manageable when viewed through the lens of 80 or more years of operation. For context, the life span for less-reliable solar panels or wind turbines may be 20-30 years. Nuclear is also not unique in taking years to develop. Consider oil and gas, where production depletes over time compared to nuclear’s steady output. According to the International Energy Agency, it typically takes 20 years between when exploration licenses are granted and hydrocarbons are actually produced.Bottom Line:
Nuclear power projects are expensive and take time. However, their longevity of operation, reliability, and emission-free power generation represent distinct advantages. The UAE provides a prime example of solid execution on large reactors, proving nuclear projects do not have to be plagued with delays and cost overruns. NUKZX is the underlying index for the Range Nuclear Renaissance Index ETF (NUKZ).Enjoyed this article? Sign up for our newsletter to receive regular insights and stay connected.