CNRG vs. PWER

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CNRG (SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF) and PWER (Macquarie Energy Transition ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds. CNRG is passively managed, while PWER is actively managed. Over the past year, CNRG returned 117.30% vs 70.78% for PWER. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CNRG charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for PWER.

Performance

CNRG vs. PWER - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER). 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 PWER's 31.35% return.

CNRG

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

PWER

• 1D: -1.00%
• 1M: 7.47%
• YTD: 31.35%
• 6M: 32.81%
• 1Y: 70.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CNRG vs. PWER - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CNRG SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF	36.68%	50.23%	-14.48%	11.69%
PWER Macquarie Energy Transition ETF	31.35%	35.28%	-3.50%	9.72%

Correlation

The correlation between CNRG and PWER is 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2023	0.71

The correlation between CNRG and PWER shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CNRG vs. PWER - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CNRG	PWER
Industrials	41.2%	12.2%
Technology	29.1%	3.8%
Utilities	25.2%	1.9%
Energy	3.0%	41.1%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	41.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CNRG vs. PWER — 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

PWER

PWER Risk / Return Rank: 93
PWER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
PWER Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
PWER Omega Ratio Rank: 90
PWER Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
PWER 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.

CNRG vs. PWER - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) and Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER). 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	PWER	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.25	3.61	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	4.45	-0.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.59	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.65	7.85	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.06	32.42	-15.36
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. PWER - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CNRG Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is comparable to the PWER Sharpe Ratio of 3.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CNRG and PWER, 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	PWER	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.25	3.61	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.62	1.24	-0.62

Drawdowns

CNRG vs. PWER - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CNRG drawdown since its inception was -68.49%, which is greater than PWER's maximum drawdown of -29.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CNRG and PWER.

Drawdown Indicators

	CNRG	PWER	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.49%	-29.68%	-38.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.73%	-9.07%	-8.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.77%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-59.17%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.12%	-1.00%	-10.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.82%	-6.22%	-25.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.90%	2.19%	+4.71%

Volatility

CNRG vs. PWER - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (CNRG) has a higher volatility of 12.13% compared to Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER) at 6.20%. This indicates that CNRG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PWER based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CNRG	PWER	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.13%	6.20%	+5.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.44%	15.55%	+9.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.49%	19.74%	+16.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.99%	23.37%	+10.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.78%	23.37%	+12.41%

CNRG vs. PWER - Expense Ratio Comparison

CNRG has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than PWER's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

CNRG vs. PWER - Dividend Comparison

CNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than PWER's 1.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
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%
PWER Macquarie Energy Transition ETF	1.05%	1.37%	1.05%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CNRG and PWER in my portfolio?

CNRG and PWER have a correlation of 0.59, 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 PWER?

CNRG has higher volatility (12.13%) compared to PWER (6.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CNRG dropped -68.49% vs PWER's -29.68%.

Which ETF is better, CNRG or PWER?

On 1-year performance, CNRG leads with 117.30% vs 70.78% for PWER. On fees, CNRG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, PWER has been the lower-risk option at 6.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CNRG or PWER?

Over the 1-year period, CNRG has performed better with a 117.30% return vs 70.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CNRG or PWER?

CNRG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for PWER.

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

PWER has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 1.01% for CNRG.

What is the main difference between CNRG and PWER?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Macquarie. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CNRG and 0.80% for PWER.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PWER currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.61 vs 3.25), 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.