CNRG vs. ACES

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CNRG (SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - CNRG tracks the S&P Kensho Clean Power Index while ACES tracks the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNRG returned 5.21%/yr vs -8.73%/yr for ACES. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNRG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ACES.

Performance

CNRG vs. ACES - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CNRG achieves a 36.68% return, which is significantly higher than ACES's 28.72% return.

CNRG

• 1D: -2.81%
• 1M: 18.72%
• YTD: 36.68%
• 6M: 32.67%
• 1Y: 117.30%
• 3Y*: 15.27%
• 5Y*: 5.21%
• 10Y*: —

ACES

• 1D: -2.84%
• 1M: 17.92%
• YTD: 28.72%
• 6M: 27.36%
• 1Y: 69.96%
• 3Y*: -1.21%
• 5Y*: -8.73%
• 10Y*: —

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

CNRG vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CNRG SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF	36.68%	50.23%	-14.48%	-11.55%	-7.98%	-15.68%	138.35%	63.26%	-2.87%
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	28.72%	25.44%	-26.71%	-20.04%	-28.44%	-19.44%	140.33%	51.70%	-5.31%

Correlation

The correlation between CNRG and ACES is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2018	0.92

The correlation between CNRG and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNRG vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNRG	ACES
Industrials	41.2%	20.3%
Technology	29.1%	24.8%
Utilities	25.2%	25.5%
Energy	3.0%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	11.1%
Basic Materials	-	9.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	3.2%
Financial Services	-	5.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CNRG vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNRG

CNRG Risk / Return Rank: 84
CNRG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
CNRG Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CNRG Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CNRG Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CNRG Martin Ratio Rank: 83

ACES

ACES Risk / Return Rank: 62
ACES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ACES Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
ACES Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ACES Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
ACES Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

CNRG vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). 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.

	CNRG	ACES	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.25	2.18	+1.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	2.77	+0.81
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.33	+0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.65	4.03	+2.62
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.06	10.16	+6.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CNRG vs. ACES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNRG Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is higher than the ACES Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNRG and ACES, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CNRG	ACES	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.25	2.18	+1.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15	-0.24	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.62	0.22	+0.40

Drawdowns

CNRG vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNRG drawdown since its inception was -68.49%, smaller than the maximum ACES drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNRG and ACES.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNRG	ACES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.49%	-79.05%	+10.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.73%	-17.44%	-0.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.77%	-58.68%	+9.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.17%	-74.44%	+15.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.12%	-56.41%	+45.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.82%	-38.87%	+7.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.90%	6.91%	-0.01%

Volatility

CNRG vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) has a higher volatility of 12.13% compared to ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) at 9.99%. This indicates that CNRG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNRG	ACES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.13%	9.99%	+2.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.44%	22.55%	+2.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.49%	32.42%	+4.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.99%	36.17%	-2.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.78%	35.59%	+0.19%

CNRG vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNRG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than ACES's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNRG vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison

CNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than ACES's 0.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	0.54%	0.70%	1.10%	1.44%	1.08%	0.71%	0.56%	1.79%	0.34%
CNRG SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF	1.01%	1.46%	1.34%	1.17%	1.23%	1.34%	0.69%	1.16%	0.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNRG and ACES in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CNRG and ACES move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CNRG or ACES?

CNRG has higher volatility (12.13%) compared to ACES (9.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNRG dropped -68.49% vs ACES's -79.05%.

Which ETF is better, CNRG or ACES?

On 5-year performance, CNRG leads with 5.21% vs -8.73% for ACES. On fees, CNRG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, ACES has been the lower-risk option at 9.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNRG or ACES?

Over the 5-year period, CNRG has performed better with a 5.21% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNRG or ACES?

CNRG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ACES.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CNRG or ACES?

CNRG has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.54% for ACES.

What is the main difference between CNRG and ACES?

CNRG tracks S&P Kensho Clean Power Index, while ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CNRG and 0.55% for ACES.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNRG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs 2.18), 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.