CTEX vs. FAN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CTEX (ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF) and FAN (First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - CTEX tracks the S&P Kensho Cleantech Index while FAN tracks the ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CTEX returned 11.07%/yr vs 14.67%/yr for FAN. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CTEX charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for FAN.

Performance

CTEX vs. FAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) and First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN). 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 CTEX having a 20.77% return and FAN slightly lower at 20.47%.

CTEX

• 1D: -6.36%
• 1M: -8.02%
• YTD: 20.77%
• 6M: 16.43%
• 1Y: 116.42%
• 3Y*: 11.07%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FAN

• 1D: -2.65%
• 1M: -5.81%
• YTD: 20.47%
• 6M: 20.15%
• 1Y: 38.86%
• 3Y*: 14.67%
• 5Y*: 4.21%
• 10Y*: 9.88%

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

CTEX vs. FAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF	20.77%	67.74%	-20.38%	-10.25%	-20.38%	-6.68%
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	20.47%	40.38%	-8.96%	-3.20%	-13.12%	-3.30%

Correlation

The correlation between CTEX and FAN is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021	0.65

The correlation between CTEX and FAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

CTEX vs. FAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CTEX	FAN
Industrials	38.2%	41.3%
Energy	36.3%	1.1%
Utilities	16.5%	55.7%
Technology	6.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	2.6%	1.7%
Basic Materials	-	0.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CTEX vs. FAN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CTEX

CTEX Risk / Return Rank: 79
CTEX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CTEX Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
CTEX Omega Ratio Rank: 69
CTEX Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CTEX Martin Ratio Rank: 77

FAN

FAN Risk / Return Rank: 63
FAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
FAN Omega Ratio Rank: 55
FAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
FAN Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

CTEX vs. FAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) and First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN). 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.

	CTEX	FAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	1.91	+0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.98	2.57	+0.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.32	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.35	3.51	+1.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.69	11.64	+2.05

CTEX vs. FAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CTEX Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the FAN Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CTEX and FAN, 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

CTEX vs. FAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CTEX drawdown since its inception was -70.31%, smaller than the maximum FAN drawdown of -79.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTEX and FAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CTEX	FAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.31%	-79.94%	+9.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.90%	-11.13%	-10.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.83%	-24.46%	-32.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-38.45%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.23%	-9.44%	-7.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-41.61%	-45.08%	+3.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.53%	3.35%	+5.18%

Volatility

CTEX vs. FAN - Volatility Comparison

ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) has a higher volatility of 19.24% compared to First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN) at 6.87%. This indicates that CTEX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CTEX	FAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.24%	6.87%	+12.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.48%	15.93%	+16.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.17%	20.41%	+23.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.59%	21.42%	+22.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.59%	20.96%	+22.63%

CTEX vs. FAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CTEX has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than FAN's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

CTEX vs. FAN - Dividend Comparison

CTEX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, more than FAN's 1.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF	1.73%	2.17%	0.57%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	1.03%	1.35%	1.52%	1.71%	1.50%	1.79%	0.84%	2.42%	2.67%	2.59%	6.04%	2.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CTEX and FAN in my portfolio?

CTEX and FAN have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CTEX or FAN?

CTEX has higher volatility (19.24%) compared to FAN (6.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTEX dropped -70.31% vs FAN's -79.94%.

Which ETF is better, CTEX or FAN?

On 3-year performance, FAN leads with 14.67% vs 11.07% for CTEX. On fees, CTEX is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FAN has been the lower-risk option at 6.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CTEX or FAN?

Over the 3-year period, FAN has performed better with a 14.67% return vs 11.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CTEX or FAN?

CTEX is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for FAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CTEX or FAN?

CTEX has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 1.03% for FAN.

What is the main difference between CTEX and FAN?

CTEX tracks S&P Kensho Cleantech Index, while FAN tracks ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for CTEX and 0.62% for FAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTEX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.91), 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.