ACES vs. INRG.L
Compare and contrast key facts about ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L).
ACES and INRG.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. ACES is a passively managed fund by SS&C that tracks the performance of the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. It was launched on Jun 29, 2018. INRG.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. It was launched on Jul 9, 2007. Both ACES and INRG.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: ACES or INRG.L.
Key characteristics
| ACES | INRG.L | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | -22.12% | -12.49% |
| 1Y Return | -30.70% | -12.35% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -26.09% | -13.33% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | -0.90% | 4.64% |
| Sharpe Ratio | -0.85 | -0.47 |
| Daily Std Dev | 38.02% | 23.62% |
| Max Drawdown | -73.33% | -85.09% |
| Current Drawdown | -71.31% | -55.13% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACES and INRG.L is 0.65, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
ACES vs. INRG.L - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, ACES achieves a -22.12% return, which is significantly lower than INRG.L's -12.49% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
ACES vs. INRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACES has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than INRG.L's 0.65% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
ACES vs. INRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L). 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.
Dividends
ACES vs. INRG.L - Dividend Comparison
ACES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, more than INRG.L's 1.12% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF | 1.41% | 1.44% | 1.08% | 0.71% | 0.56% | 1.30% | 0.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.12% | 1.00% | 0.62% | 1.01% | 0.61% | 2.05% | 3.68% | 3.69% | 3.65% | 3.90% | 3.05% | 2.70% |
Drawdowns
ACES vs. INRG.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACES drawdown since its inception was -73.33%, smaller than the maximum INRG.L drawdown of -85.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACES and INRG.L. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
ACES vs. INRG.L - Volatility Comparison
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a higher volatility of 10.96% compared to iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) at 4.46%. This indicates that ACES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.