ACSG vs. PBW

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

ACSG (American Century Small Cap Growth Insights ETF) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds. ACSG is actively managed, while PBW is passively managed. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACSG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for PBW.

Performance

ACSG vs. PBW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Century Small Cap Growth Insights ETF (ACSG) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACSG achieves a 11.29% return, which is significantly lower than PBW's 33.66% return.

ACSG

• 1D: -3.92%
• 1M: -2.71%
• YTD: 11.29%
• 6M: 9.65%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBW

• 1D: -10.80%
• 1M: 1.75%
• YTD: 33.66%
• 6M: 27.62%
• 1Y: 126.13%
• 3Y*: 3.52%
• 5Y*: -11.94%
• 10Y*: 9.58%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACSG vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ACSG American Century Small Cap Growth Insights ETF	11.29%	1.17%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	33.66%	-9.96%

Correlation

The correlation between ACSG and PBW is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2025	0.79

ACSG vs. PBW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACSG	PBW
Industrials	23.4%	34.3%
Healthcare	22.7%	-
Technology	22.0%	14.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	13.9%
Financial Services	7.6%	1.4%
Basic Materials	3.9%	16.4%
Energy	3.1%	12.3%
Communication Services	2.2%	-
Real Estate	2.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	1.1%
Utilities	1.7%	6.3%

Return for Risk

ACSG vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 83
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 72
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

ACSG vs. PBW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Small Cap Growth Insights ETF (ACSG) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ACSG	PBW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	3.03	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.28	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.25	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	-0.04	+0.96

Drawdowns

ACSG vs. PBW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACSG drawdown since its inception was -13.28%, smaller than the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSG and PBW.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACSG	PBW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.28%	-89.02%	+75.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-21.24%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-68.04%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-84.50%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-89.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.12%	-66.31%	+62.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.01%	-62.91%	+59.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	7.68%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ACSG	PBW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	17.83%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	30.55%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.55%	41.85%	-19.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.55%	43.17%	-20.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.55%	38.90%	-16.35%

ACSG vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACSG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACSG vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison

ACSG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACSG American Century Small Cap Growth Insights ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	0.67%	0.79%	2.84%	3.68%	4.21%	1.71%	0.44%	1.45%	2.04%	1.28%	2.68%	1.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACSG and PBW in my portfolio?

ACSG and PBW have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ACSG or PBW?

On fees, ACSG is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACSG or PBW?

ACSG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACSG or PBW?

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 0.67%, compared with 0.00% for ACSG.

What is the main difference between ACSG and PBW?

They also come from different issuers: American Century and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ACSG and 0.61% for PBW.