EBLU vs. TAN

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EBLU (Ecofin Global Water ESG Fund) and TAN (Invesco Solar ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EBLU is a Water Equities fund tracking the Ecofin Water ESG Index, while TAN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MAC Global Solar Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EBLU returned 3.88%/yr vs -1.61%/yr for TAN. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EBLU charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for TAN.

Performance

EBLU vs. TAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ecofin Global Water ESG Fund (EBLU) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EBLU achieves a -1.55% return, which is significantly lower than TAN's 43.40% return.

EBLU

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -3.30%
• YTD: -1.55%
• 6M: -3.24%
• 1Y: -1.21%
• 3Y*: 9.93%
• 5Y*: 3.88%
• 10Y*: —

TAN

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 16.03%
• YTD: 43.40%
• 6M: 46.63%
• 1Y: 112.68%
• 3Y*: -0.45%
• 5Y*: -1.61%
• 10Y*: 13.36%

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

EBLU vs. TAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EBLU Ecofin Global Water ESG Fund	-1.55%	11.82%	8.54%	20.95%	-25.99%	28.93%	15.74%	38.72%	-12.80%	20.21%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	43.40%	48.31%	-37.61%	-26.79%	-5.24%	-25.10%	233.96%	66.53%	-25.67%	37.67%

Correlation

The correlation between EBLU and TAN is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 16, 2017	0.45

The correlation between EBLU and TAN shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (1 year) to 0.50 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EBLU vs. TAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EBLU	TAN
Industrials	70.6%	3.3%
Utilities	20.1%	22.1%
Technology	4.0%	9.7%
Basic Materials	4.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	-
Energy	1.1%	57.3%
Consumer Cyclical	0.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Financial Services	-	3.6%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EBLU vs. TAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

EBLU

EBLU Risk / Return Rank: 8
EBLU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
EBLU Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
EBLU Omega Ratio Rank: 8
EBLU Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
EBLU Martin Ratio Rank: 8

TAN

TAN Risk / Return Rank: 86
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 75
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

EBLU vs. TAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ecofin Global Water ESG Fund (EBLU) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). 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.

	EBLU	TAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.08	3.05	-3.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.02	3.62	-3.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.44	-0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.09	8.32	-8.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.22	20.11	-20.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EBLU vs. TAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBLU Sharpe Ratio is -0.08, which is lower than the TAN Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBLU and TAN, 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

	EBLU	TAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08	3.05	-3.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22	-0.04	+0.27
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.35	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	-0.12	+0.62

Drawdowns

EBLU vs. TAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBLU drawdown since its inception was -37.58%, smaller than the maximum TAN drawdown of -95.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBLU and TAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	EBLU	TAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.58%	-95.29%	+57.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.17%	-13.62%	+0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.42%	-64.40%	+48.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.36%	-73.95%	+38.59%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-78.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.25%	-67.65%	+56.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.15%	-78.51%	+70.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.51%	5.62%	-0.11%

Volatility

EBLU vs. TAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Ecofin Global Water ESG Fund (EBLU) is 4.35%, while Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) has a volatility of 11.73%. This indicates that EBLU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EBLU	TAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.35%	11.73%	-7.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.47%	25.32%	-13.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.41%	37.11%	-22.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.32%	39.73%	-22.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.96%	37.97%	-19.01%

EBLU vs. TAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

EBLU has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than TAN's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

EBLU vs. TAN - Dividend Comparison

EBLU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.36%, while TAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EBLU Ecofin Global Water ESG Fund	3.36%	3.31%	1.34%	1.46%	1.64%	1.55%	1.42%	1.58%	1.35%	1.32%	0.00%	0.00%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.50%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.09%	0.30%	0.69%	1.77%	5.04%	1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EBLU and TAN in my portfolio?

EBLU and TAN have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EBLU or TAN?

TAN has higher volatility (11.73%) compared to EBLU (4.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBLU dropped -37.58% vs TAN's -95.29%.

Which ETF is better, EBLU or TAN?

On 5-year performance, EBLU leads with 3.88% vs -1.61% for TAN. On fees, EBLU is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, EBLU has been the lower-risk option at 4.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EBLU or TAN?

Over the 5-year period, EBLU has performed better with a 3.88% return vs -1.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EBLU or TAN?

EBLU is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EBLU or TAN?

EBLU has the higher dividend yield at 3.36%, compared with 0.00% for TAN.

What is the main difference between EBLU and TAN?

EBLU is categorized as Water Equities, while TAN is Alternative Energy Equities. EBLU tracks Ecofin Water ESG Index, while TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Tortoise and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for EBLU and 0.69% for TAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs -0.08), 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.