CTEX vs. IBAT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CTEX (ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF) and IBAT (iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - CTEX tracks the S&P Kensho Cleantech Index while IBAT tracks the STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CTEX returned 154.30% vs 124.45% for IBAT. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CTEX charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBAT.

Performance

CTEX vs. IBAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) and iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CTEX achieves a 39.97% return, which is significantly lower than IBAT's 64.52% return.

CTEX

• 1D: -4.08%
• 1M: 24.08%
• YTD: 39.97%
• 6M: 41.91%
• 1Y: 154.30%
• 3Y*: 16.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBAT

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: 10.03%
• YTD: 64.52%
• 6M: 57.93%
• 1Y: 124.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CTEX vs. IBAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF	39.97%	67.74%	-6.15%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	64.52%	32.09%	-13.19%

Correlation

The correlation between CTEX and IBAT is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024	0.73

The correlation between CTEX and IBAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

CTEX vs. IBAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CTEX	IBAT
Industrials	48.9%	41.6%
Technology	34.7%	23.4%
Utilities	11.5%	0.4%
Energy	3.0%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	1.8%	1.9%
Basic Materials	-	29.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CTEX vs. IBAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CTEX

CTEX Risk / Return Rank: 88
CTEX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
CTEX Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CTEX Omega Ratio Rank: 80
CTEX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
CTEX Martin Ratio Rank: 89

IBAT

IBAT Risk / Return Rank: 95
IBAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
IBAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
IBAT Omega Ratio Rank: 94
IBAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
IBAT Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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. IBAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) and iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT). 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.

	CTEX	IBAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.68	4.75	-1.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.79	5.12	-1.33
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.68	-0.19
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.18	10.21	-3.03
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.95	26.91	-6.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CTEX vs. IBAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CTEX Sharpe Ratio is 3.68, which is comparable to the IBAT Sharpe Ratio of 4.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CTEX and IBAT, 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

	CTEX	IBAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.68	4.75	-1.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.11	1.41	-1.30

Drawdowns

CTEX vs. IBAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CTEX drawdown since its inception was -70.31%, which is greater than IBAT's maximum drawdown of -28.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTEX and IBAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	CTEX	IBAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.31%	-28.26%	-42.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.62%	-12.25%	-9.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.08%	-1.25%	-2.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-41.94%	-7.74%	-34.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.77%	4.64%	+3.13%

Volatility

CTEX vs. IBAT - Volatility Comparison

ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) has a higher volatility of 15.79% compared to iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT) at 10.25%. This indicates that CTEX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CTEX	IBAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.79%	10.25%	+5.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.89%	20.28%	+9.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.32%	26.35%	+15.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.30%	23.83%	+19.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.30%	23.83%	+19.47%

CTEX vs. IBAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

CTEX has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than IBAT's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

CTEX vs. IBAT - Dividend Comparison

CTEX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, more than IBAT's 0.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF	1.50%	2.17%	0.57%	0.12%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	0.70%	1.15%	1.37%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CTEX and IBAT in my portfolio?

CTEX and IBAT have a correlation of 0.74, 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 IBAT?

CTEX has higher volatility (15.79%) compared to IBAT (10.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTEX dropped -70.31% vs IBAT's -28.26%.

Which ETF is better, CTEX or IBAT?

On 1-year performance, CTEX leads with 154.30% vs 124.45% for IBAT. On fees, IBAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, IBAT has been the lower-risk option at 10.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CTEX or IBAT?

Over the 1-year period, CTEX has performed better with a 154.30% return vs 124.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CTEX or IBAT?

IBAT is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for CTEX.

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

CTEX has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.70% for IBAT.

What is the main difference between CTEX and IBAT?

CTEX tracks S&P Kensho Cleantech Index, while IBAT tracks STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for CTEX and 0.47% for IBAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.75 vs 3.68), 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.