CSEN vs. FRNW

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

CSEN (Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF) and FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSEN is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Cohen & Steers, while FRNW is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Their 0.45 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CSEN charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FRNW.

Performance

CSEN vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF (CSEN) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CSEN

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 5.61%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

FRNW

• 1D: 1.70%
• 1M: -4.27%
• 6M: 1.53%
• YTD: 12.33%
• 1Y: 38.08%
• 3Y*: 6.69%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -1.24%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF	$463.01K	$572.30K	$765.26K
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	$663.30K	$1.01M	$2.63M

CSEN vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF	0.47%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	-8.76%

Correlation

The correlation between CSEN and FRNW is 0.45, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2026	0.45

Return for Risk

CSEN vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CSEN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 50
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 47

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CSEN vs. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF (CSEN) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). 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.

	CSEN	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.38	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.94	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.23	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.73	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	5.51	—

Drawdowns

CSEN vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSEN drawdown since its inception was -5.10%, smaller than the maximum FRNW drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSEN and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSEN	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.10%	-59.37%	+54.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-22.08%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-39.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.19%	-18.88%	+17.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.20%	-32.70%	+30.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	6.92%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CSEN	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	8.65%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	20.77%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.99%	27.79%	-10.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.99%	28.55%	-11.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.99%	28.55%	-11.56%

CSEN vs. FRNW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSEN has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than FRNW's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSEN vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

CSEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than FRNW's 1.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF	0.32%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	1.22%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSEN and FRNW in my portfolio?

CSEN and FRNW have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CSEN or FRNW?

On fees, FRNW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSEN or FRNW?

FRNW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for CSEN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CSEN or FRNW?

FRNW has the higher dividend yield at 1.22%, compared with 0.32% for CSEN.

What is the main difference between CSEN and FRNW?

CSEN is categorized as Energy Equities, while FRNW is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for CSEN and 0.39% for FRNW.