AES vs. ICLN

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about The AES Corporation (AES) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN).

ICLN is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. It was launched on Jun 24, 2008.

Performance

AES vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The AES Corporation (AES) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

AES vs. ICLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AES The AES Corporation	0.20%	18.26%	-30.40%	-30.88%	21.69%	5.94%	22.16%	42.14%	39.02%	-2.69%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	11.08%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AES achieves a 0.20% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 11.08% return. Over the past 10 years, AES has underperformed ICLN with an annualized return of 5.95%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively higher 8.94% annualized return.

AES

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: -0.07%
• YTD: 0.20%
• 6M: -5.33%
• 1Y: 21.36%
• 3Y*: -12.21%
• 5Y*: -8.72%
• 10Y*: 5.95%

ICLN

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: -0.44%
• YTD: 11.08%
• 6M: 15.82%
• 1Y: 61.77%
• 3Y*: -1.04%
• 5Y*: -4.16%
• 10Y*: 8.94%

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

Return for Risk

AES vs. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

AES

AES Risk / Return Rank: 57
AES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
AES Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
AES Omega Ratio Rank: 56
AES Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
AES Martin Ratio Rank: 60

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 94
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 89
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

AES vs. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The AES Corporation (AES) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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.

	AES	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.43	2.38	-1.95
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.96	3.01	-2.05
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.38	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.90	5.60	-4.70
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.95	15.65	-13.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AES vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AES Sharpe Ratio is 0.43, which is lower than the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AES and ICLN, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AES	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43	2.38	-1.95
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.23	-0.15	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.17	0.33	-0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.13	-0.12	+0.24

Correlation

The correlation between AES and ICLN is 0.49, 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.

Dividends

AES vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

AES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.96%, more than ICLN's 1.47% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AES The AES Corporation	4.96%	4.91%	5.36%	3.45%	2.20%	2.48%	2.44%	2.74%	3.60%	4.43%	3.79%	4.18%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.47%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%

Drawdowns

AES vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AES drawdown since its inception was -98.65%, which is greater than ICLN's maximum drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AES and ICLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	AES	ICLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.65%	-87.15%	-11.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.27%	-11.22%	-12.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-63.43%	-57.16%	-6.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-63.43%	-66.75%	+3.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-63.77%	-50.31%	-13.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.99%	-66.84%	+9.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.72%	4.01%	+6.71%

Volatility

AES vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for The AES Corporation (AES) is 1.73%, while iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a volatility of 10.23%. This indicates that AES experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AES	ICLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.73%	10.23%	-8.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.77%	20.47%	+12.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	49.97%	26.14%	+23.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.05%	27.16%	+10.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.17%	27.04%	+9.13%