CNRG vs. PBD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CNRG (SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF) and PBD (Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - CNRG tracks the S&P Kensho Clean Power Index while PBD tracks the WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CNRG returned 2.77%/yr vs -6.39%/yr for PBD. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CNRG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PBD.

Performance

CNRG vs. PBD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD). 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 PBD slightly lower at 22.17%.

CNRG

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

PBD

• 1D: -4.35%
• 1M: -9.60%
• YTD: 22.17%
• 6M: 20.69%
• 1Y: 65.94%
• 3Y*: 5.01%
• 5Y*: -6.39%
• 10Y*: 8.85%

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

CNRG vs. PBD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CNRG SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF	23.15%	50.23%	-14.48%	-11.55%	-7.98%	-15.68%	138.35%	63.26%	-2.05%
PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF	22.17%	43.65%	-26.39%	-10.69%	-29.70%	-22.30%	145.46%	40.00%	-4.64%

Correlation

The correlation between CNRG and PBD is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2018	0.86

The correlation between CNRG and PBD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

CNRG vs. PBD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNRG	PBD
Industrials	37.1%	44.3%
Utilities	27.1%	11.7%
Energy	23.5%	12.3%
Technology	10.6%	7.6%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	12.5%
Basic Materials	-	3.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	0.9%
Financial Services	-	0.9%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CNRG vs. PBD — 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

PBD

PBD Risk / Return Rank: 83
PBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
PBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PBD Omega Ratio Rank: 77
PBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
PBD Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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. PBD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD). 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	PBD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	2.65	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	3.20	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.43	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.36	5.19	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.03	16.38	-3.35

CNRG vs. PBD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNRG Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the PBD Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNRG and PBD, 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. PBD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNRG drawdown since its inception was -68.49%, smaller than the maximum PBD drawdown of -78.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNRG and PBD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNRG	PBD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.49%	-78.60%	+10.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.01%	-12.78%	-5.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.77%	-52.45%	+3.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.17%	-69.15%	+9.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-75.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.92%	-46.21%	+26.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.72%	-53.36%	+21.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.39%	4.04%	+3.35%

Volatility

CNRG vs. PBD - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) has a higher volatility of 15.67% compared to Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD) at 10.77%. This indicates that CNRG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNRG	PBD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.67%	10.77%	+4.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.25%	19.50%	+7.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	38.05%	25.04%	+13.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.47%	28.67%	+5.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.98%	27.33%	+8.65%

CNRG vs. PBD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNRG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than PBD's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNRG vs. PBD - Dividend Comparison

CNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, less than PBD's 1.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF	1.56%	2.71%	1.81%	2.85%	2.98%	0.67%	0.48%	1.83%	1.86%	1.76%	2.04%	1.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNRG and PBD in my portfolio?

CNRG and PBD have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CNRG or PBD?

CNRG has higher volatility (15.67%) compared to PBD (10.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNRG dropped -68.49% vs PBD's -78.60%.

Which ETF is better, CNRG or PBD?

On 5-year performance, CNRG leads with 2.77% vs -6.39% for PBD. On fees, CNRG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, PBD has been the lower-risk option at 10.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNRG or PBD?

Over the 5-year period, CNRG has performed better with a 2.77% return vs -6.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNRG or PBD?

CNRG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PBD.

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

PBD has the higher dividend yield at 1.56%, compared with 1.11% for CNRG.

What is the main difference between CNRG and PBD?

CNRG tracks S&P Kensho Clean Power Index, while PBD tracks WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CNRG and 0.75% for PBD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 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.