CNRG vs. CTEC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CNRG (SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF) and CTEC (Global X CleanTech ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - CNRG tracks the S&P Kensho Clean Power Index while CTEC tracks the Indxx Global CleanTech Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNRG returned 2.77%/yr vs -7.77%/yr for CTEC. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNRG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CTEC.

Performance

CNRG vs. CTEC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CNRG having a 23.15% return and CTEC slightly lower at 22.71%.

CNRG

• 1D: -4.63%
• 1M: -5.18%
• YTD: 23.15%
• 6M: 19.33%
• 1Y: 95.92%
• 3Y*: 12.18%
• 5Y*: 2.77%
• 10Y*: —

CTEC

• 1D: -6.61%
• 1M: -11.86%
• YTD: 22.71%
• 6M: 19.40%
• 1Y: 97.04%
• 3Y*: -1.56%
• 5Y*: -7.77%
• 10Y*: —

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

CNRG vs. CTEC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CNRG SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF	23.15%	50.23%	-14.48%	-11.55%	-7.98%	-15.68%	43.16%
CTEC Global X CleanTech ETF	22.71%	57.85%	-36.35%	-25.60%	-16.82%	-22.19%	44.74%

Correlation

The correlation between CNRG and CTEC 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	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 29, 2020	0.89

The correlation between CNRG and CTEC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNRG vs. CTEC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNRG	CTEC
Industrials	37.1%	60.0%
Utilities	27.1%	1.7%
Energy	23.5%	24.8%
Technology	10.6%	31.2%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	3.9%
Basic Materials	-	3.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CNRG vs. CTEC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CNRG

CNRG Risk / Return Rank: 76
CNRG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
CNRG Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
CNRG Omega Ratio Rank: 67
CNRG Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CNRG Martin Ratio Rank: 73

CTEC

CTEC Risk / Return Rank: 78
CTEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
CTEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
CTEC Omega Ratio Rank: 70
CTEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CTEC Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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. CTEC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and Global X CleanTech ETF (CTEC). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	CNRG	CTEC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	2.61	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	3.03	-0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.39	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.36	5.03	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.03	13.11	-0.09

CNRG vs. CTEC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNRG Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the CTEC Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNRG and CTEC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CNRG vs. CTEC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNRG drawdown since its inception was -68.49%, smaller than the maximum CTEC drawdown of -81.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNRG and CTEC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNRG	CTEC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.49%	-81.58%	+13.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.01%	-19.39%	+1.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.77%	-65.77%	+17.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.17%	-76.46%	+17.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.92%	-53.45%	+33.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-52.35%	+20.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.39%	7.43%	-0.04%

Volatility

CNRG vs. CTEC - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and Global X CleanTech ETF (CTEC) have volatilities of 15.67% and 16.15%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNRG	CTEC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.67%	16.15%	-0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.25%	27.21%	+0.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.05%	37.40%	+0.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.47%	36.94%	-2.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.98%	38.09%	-2.11%

CNRG vs. CTEC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNRG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than CTEC's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNRG vs. CTEC - Dividend Comparison

CNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, more than CTEC's 0.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CNRG SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF	1.11%	1.46%	1.34%	1.17%	1.23%	1.34%	0.69%	1.16%	0.35%
CTEC Global X CleanTech ETF	0.61%	0.75%	1.56%	0.51%	0.25%	0.39%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNRG and CTEC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CNRG and CTEC 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 CTEC?

CTEC has higher volatility (16.15%) compared to CNRG (15.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNRG dropped -68.49% vs CTEC's -81.58%.

Which ETF is better, CNRG or CTEC?

On 5-year performance, CNRG leads with 2.77% vs -7.77% for CTEC. On fees, CNRG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CNRG has been the lower-risk option at 15.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNRG or CTEC?

Over the 5-year period, CNRG has performed better with a 2.77% return vs -7.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNRG or CTEC?

CNRG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CTEC.

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

CNRG has the higher dividend yield at 1.11%, compared with 0.61% for CTEC.

What is the main difference between CNRG and CTEC?

CNRG tracks S&P Kensho Clean Power Index, while CTEC tracks Indxx Global CleanTech Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CNRG and 0.50% for CTEC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTEC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.53), 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.