PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ACES vs. ERTH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ACES vs. ERTH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) and Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACES achieves a 32.49% return, which is significantly higher than ERTH's 9.21% return.


ACES

1D
2.95%
1M
20.25%
YTD
32.49%
6M
32.78%
1Y
80.47%
3Y*
-0.25%
5Y*
-8.07%
10Y*

ERTH

1D
1.09%
1M
3.37%
YTD
9.21%
6M
10.41%
1Y
25.31%
3Y*
3.73%
5Y*
-3.27%
10Y*
7.56%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACES vs. ERTH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ACES
ALPS Clean Energy ETF
32.49%25.44%-26.71%-20.04%-28.44%-19.44%140.33%51.70%-9.63%
ERTH
Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF
9.21%18.47%-13.56%0.12%-27.59%2.64%51.02%36.78%-12.59%

Correlation

The correlation between ACES and ERTH is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.85

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018

0.84

The correlation between ACES and ERTH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

ACES vs. ERTH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ACES
ERTH

Utilities

25.5%
6.5%

Technology

24.8%
10.5%

Industrials

20.3%
21.0%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
14.3%

Basic Materials

9.3%
2.3%

Financial Services

5.3%
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

3.2%
2.1%

Energy

0.5%
8.5%

Communication Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

26.7%

Utilities

ACES
25.5%
ERTH
6.5%

Technology

ACES
24.8%
ERTH
10.5%

Industrials

ACES
20.3%
ERTH
21.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ACES
11.1%
ERTH
14.3%

Basic Materials

ACES
9.3%
ERTH
2.3%

Financial Services

ACES
5.3%
ERTH
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

ACES
3.2%
ERTH
2.1%

Energy

ACES
0.5%
ERTH
8.5%

Communication Services

ACES

-

ERTH

-

Healthcare

ACES

-

ERTH

-

Real Estate

ACES

-

ERTH
26.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ACES vs. ERTH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACES
ACES Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
ACES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACES Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACES Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
ACES Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACES Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank

ERTH
ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
ERTH Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACES vs. ERTH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) and Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


ACESERTHDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.51

1.52

+0.98

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.09

2.14

+0.95

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.26

+0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.47

3.08

+1.39

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.30

8.58

+2.71

ACES vs. ERTH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACES Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is higher than the ERTH Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACES and ERTH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ACESERTHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.51

1.52

+0.98

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.22

-0.14

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.23

0.21

+0.02

Drawdowns

ACES vs. ERTH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACES drawdown since its inception was -79.05%, which is greater than ERTH's maximum drawdown of -64.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACES and ERTH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ACESERTHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-79.05%

-64.45%

-14.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.44%

-8.07%

-9.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-58.68%

-33.82%

-24.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-74.44%

-51.72%

-22.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-51.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-55.14%

-26.43%

-28.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-38.86%

-21.47%

-17.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.91%

2.90%

+4.01%

Volatility

ACES vs. ERTH - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a higher volatility of 9.41% compared to Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) at 5.16%. This indicates that ACES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ERTH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ACESERTHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.41%

5.16%

+4.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.55%

11.78%

+10.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

32.32%

16.69%

+15.63%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

36.15%

22.85%

+13.30%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

35.58%

22.62%

+12.96%

ACES vs. ERTH - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both ACES and ERTH have an expense ratio of 0.55%.


Dividends

ACES vs. ERTH - Dividend Comparison

ACES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than ERTH's 1.37% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACES
ALPS Clean Energy ETF
0.53%0.70%1.10%1.44%1.08%0.71%0.56%1.79%0.34%0.00%0.00%0.00%
ERTH
Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF
1.37%1.46%1.00%1.28%1.22%15.33%0.21%0.71%0.61%0.87%1.06%0.79%

Frequently Asked Questions


ACES and ERTH have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ACES has higher volatility (9.41%) compared to ERTH (5.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACES dropped -79.05% vs ERTH's -64.45%.

On 5-year performance, ERTH leads with -3.27% vs -8.07% for ACES. Both ETFs have the same 0.55% expense ratio. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 5.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, ERTH has performed better with a -3.27% return vs -8.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ACES and ERTH have the same expense ratio: 0.55% per year.

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 0.53% for ACES.

ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index, while ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Invesco.

ACES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 1.52), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ACES and ERTH

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer