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. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSEN charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for PXJ.
Performance
CSEN vs. PXJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CSEN
- 1D
- 0.84%
- 1M
- -0.75%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PXJ
- 1D
- 1.15%
- 1M
- -5.23%
- 6M
- 27.71%
- YTD
- 42.99%
- 1Y
- 69.03%
- 3Y*
- 18.77%
- 5Y*
- 21.67%
- 10Y*
- -1.23%
CSEN vs. PXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF | -0.75% |
PXJ Invesco Dynamic Oil & Gas Services ETF | -5.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSEN and PXJ is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2026 | 0.62 |
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 | — | 1.41 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.77 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 13.48 | — |
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 | -1.00% | -67.33% | +66.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.76% | -55.72% | +52.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 5.16% | — |
Volatility
CSEN vs. PXJ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSEN | PXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.65% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 19.23% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.52% | 26.80% | -11.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.52% | 34.34% | -18.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.52% | 39.20% | -23.68% |
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 0.33%, less than PXJ's 2.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSEN Cohen & Steers Future of Energy Active ETF | 0.33% | 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 | 2.44% | 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 0.62, 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 2.44%, compared with 0.33% 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