ECLN vs. POWR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ECLN (First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF) and POWR (iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF) are both Utilities Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ECLN returned 11.85%/yr vs 15.16%/yr for POWR. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ECLN charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for POWR.

Performance

ECLN vs. POWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) and iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECLN achieves a 12.15% return, which is significantly lower than POWR's 18.53% return.

ECLN

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: -2.95%
• YTD: 12.15%
• 6M: 10.16%
• 1Y: 19.15%
• 3Y*: 17.15%
• 5Y*: 11.85%
• 10Y*: —

POWR

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -0.93%
• YTD: 18.53%
• 6M: 15.28%
• 1Y: 28.87%
• 3Y*: 12.09%
• 5Y*: 15.16%
• 10Y*: 8.66%

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

ECLN vs. POWR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ECLN First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF	12.15%	16.78%	22.60%	-3.36%	5.28%	12.26%	8.98%	5.66%
POWR iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF	18.53%	10.81%	-1.30%	3.66%	42.54%	42.03%	-28.30%	10.41%

Correlation

The correlation between ECLN and POWR is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2019	0.42

ECLN vs. POWR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ECLN	POWR
Utilities	76.4%	52.8%
Energy	16.3%	17.3%
Industrials	6.8%	26.6%
Technology	0.5%	2.9%
Basic Materials	-	1.0%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ECLN vs. POWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECLN

ECLN Risk / Return Rank: 59
ECLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
ECLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ECLN Omega Ratio Rank: 50
ECLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
ECLN Martin Ratio Rank: 59

POWR

POWR Risk / Return Rank: 59
POWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
POWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
POWR Omega Ratio Rank: 47
POWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
POWR Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

ECLN vs. POWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) and iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR). 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.

	ECLN	POWR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	1.74	+0.09
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.68	2.41	+0.27
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.30	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.83	4.85	-1.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.36	12.19	-1.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ECLN vs. POWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECLN Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the POWR Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECLN and POWR, 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

	ECLN	POWR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.83	1.74	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84	0.66	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.34	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.67	0.19	+0.49

Drawdowns

ECLN vs. POWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECLN drawdown since its inception was -32.28%, smaller than the maximum POWR drawdown of -65.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECLN and POWR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECLN	POWR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.28%	-65.98%	+33.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.02%	-5.98%	+0.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.68%	-23.14%	+8.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.88%	-25.09%	+5.21%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.42%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.65%	-1.45%	-2.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.99%	-18.15%	+13.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.86%	2.38%	-0.52%

Volatility

ECLN vs. POWR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF (ECLN) is 3.85%, while iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF (POWR) has a volatility of 5.80%. This indicates that ECLN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than POWR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ECLN	POWR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.85%	5.80%	-1.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.15%	12.35%	-4.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.51%	16.65%	-6.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.22%	23.08%	-8.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.41%	25.62%	-8.21%

ECLN vs. POWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECLN has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than POWR's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECLN vs. POWR - Dividend Comparison

ECLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, less than POWR's 6.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ECLN First Trust EIP Carbon Impact ETF	1.83%	1.97%	2.52%	2.54%	1.72%	1.66%	1.68%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
POWR iShares U.S. Power Infrastructure ETF	6.67%	7.56%	4.36%	4.16%	4.82%	3.94%	3.96%	5.71%	3.17%	3.11%	2.75%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECLN and POWR in my portfolio?

ECLN and POWR have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ECLN or POWR?

POWR has higher volatility (5.80%) compared to ECLN (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECLN dropped -32.28% vs POWR's -65.98%.

Which ETF is better, ECLN or POWR?

On 5-year performance, POWR leads with 15.16% vs 11.85% for ECLN. On fees, POWR is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ECLN has been the lower-risk option at 3.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECLN or POWR?

Over the 5-year period, POWR has performed better with a 15.16% return vs 11.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECLN or POWR?

POWR is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for ECLN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECLN or POWR?

POWR has the higher dividend yield at 6.67%, compared with 1.83% for ECLN.

What is the main difference between ECLN and POWR?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for ECLN and 0.40% for POWR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.74), 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.