CSEN vs. PXJ
CSEN (Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF) and PXJ (Invesco Dynamic Oil & Gas Services ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. CSEN is actively managed, while PXJ is passively managed. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CSEN charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for PXJ.
Performance
CSEN vs. PXJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CSEN
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 5.61%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
PXJ
- 1D
- -0.99%
- 1M
- 9.27%
- 6M
- 19.81%
- YTD
- 45.40%
- 1Y
- 76.50%
- 3Y*
- 15.88%
- 5Y*
- 24.47%
- 10Y*
- -0.40%
- ALL TIME*
- -1.75%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $463.01K | $572.30K | $765.26K | |
| $738.38K | $1.21M | $1.86M |
CSEN vs. PXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF | 0.47% |
PXJ Invesco Dynamic Oil & Gas Services ETF | -3.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSEN and PXJ is 0.64, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2026 | 0.64 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CSEN vs. PXJ — Risk / Return Rank
CSEN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PXJ
CSEN vs. PXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF (CSEN) and Invesco Dynamic Oil & Gas Services ETF (PXJ). 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 | PXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.46 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.18 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 13.74 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CSEN vs. PXJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSEN drawdown since its inception was -5.10%, smaller than the maximum PXJ drawdown of -94.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSEN and PXJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSEN | PXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.10% | -94.82% | +89.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -18.39% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -40.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -40.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -87.72% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.19% | -66.78% | +65.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.20% | -55.75% | +53.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 5.59% | — |
Volatility
CSEN vs. PXJ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSEN | PXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 7.33% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 19.22% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.99% | 26.06% | -9.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.99% | 34.16% | -17.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.99% | 39.17% | -22.18% |
CSEN vs. PXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSEN has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than PXJ's 0.63% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSEN vs. PXJ - Dividend Comparison
CSEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than PXJ's 2.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF | 0.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PXJ Invesco Dynamic Oil & Gas Services ETF | 2.40% | 2.91% | 3.34% | 1.99% | 0.65% | 2.40% | 4.72% | 1.87% | 0.99% | 2.75% | 1.18% | 2.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSEN and PXJ have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PXJ is cheaper at 0.63% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PXJ is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for CSEN.
PXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.32% for CSEN.
They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for CSEN and 0.63% for PXJ.
Find the right allocation for CSEN and PXJ
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer