ENFR vs. ACES

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while ACES is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ENFR returned 19.91%/yr vs -8.73%/yr for ACES. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ENFR charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ACES.

Performance

ENFR vs. ACES - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ENFR achieves a 24.60% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 28.72% return.

ENFR

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: -1.01%
• YTD: 24.60%
• 6M: 24.41%
• 1Y: 25.40%
• 3Y*: 27.99%
• 5Y*: 19.91%
• 10Y*: 11.96%

ACES

• 1D: -2.84%
• 1M: 17.92%
• YTD: 28.72%
• 6M: 27.36%
• 1Y: 69.96%
• 3Y*: -1.21%
• 5Y*: -8.73%
• 10Y*: —

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

ENFR vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	24.60%	5.88%	42.17%	15.63%	17.48%	39.97%	-24.14%	21.60%	-16.70%
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	28.72%	25.44%	-26.71%	-20.04%	-28.44%	-19.44%	140.33%	51.70%	-9.63%

Correlation

The correlation between ENFR and ACES is 0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018	0.39

Over the past year, the correlation between ENFR and ACES has dropped to 0.03 - well below their long-term average of 0.39, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

ENFR vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ENFR	ACES
Energy	98.8%	0.5%
Industrials	3.4%	20.3%
Utilities	1.0%	25.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	5.3%
Basic Materials	-	9.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	24.8%

Return for Risk

ENFR vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENFR

ENFR Risk / Return Rank: 50
ENFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
ENFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
ENFR Omega Ratio Rank: 47
ENFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ENFR Martin Ratio Rank: 48

ACES

ACES Risk / Return Rank: 62
ACES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ACES Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
ACES Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ACES Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
ACES Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

ENFR vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). 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.

	ENFR	ACES	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	2.18	-0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.41	2.77	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.33	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.95	4.03	-1.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.06	10.16	-2.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ENFR vs. ACES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the ACES Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENFR and ACES, 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

	ENFR	ACES	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.75	2.18	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.04	-0.24	+1.28
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.22	+0.13

Drawdowns

ENFR vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENFR drawdown since its inception was -68.28%, smaller than the maximum ACES drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENFR and ACES.

Drawdown Indicators

	ENFR	ACES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.28%	-79.05%	+10.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.64%	-17.44%	+8.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.58%	-58.68%	+43.10%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.29%	-74.44%	+54.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-62.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.95%	-56.41%	+51.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.98%	-38.87%	+22.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	6.91%	-3.75%

Volatility

ENFR vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) is 6.18%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 9.99%. This indicates that ENFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ENFR	ACES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.18%	9.99%	-3.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.47%	22.55%	-11.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.64%	32.42%	-17.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.30%	36.17%	-16.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.69%	35.59%	-10.90%

ENFR vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison

ENFR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than ACES's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

ENFR vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison

ENFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.03%, more than ACES's 0.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	0.54%	0.70%	1.10%	1.44%	1.08%	0.71%	0.56%	1.79%	0.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.03%	4.77%	4.41%	5.48%	5.23%	7.86%	7.57%	5.81%	3.98%	2.98%	3.31%	3.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ENFR and ACES in my portfolio?

ENFR and ACES have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ENFR or ACES?

ACES has higher volatility (9.99%) compared to ENFR (6.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENFR dropped -68.28% vs ACES's -79.05%.

Which ETF is better, ENFR or ACES?

On 5-year performance, ENFR leads with 19.91% vs -8.73% for ACES. On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, ENFR has been the lower-risk option at 6.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ENFR or ACES?

Over the 5-year period, ENFR has performed better with a 19.91% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ENFR or ACES?

ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ACES.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ENFR or ACES?

ENFR has the higher dividend yield at 4.03%, compared with 0.54% for ACES.

What is the main difference between ENFR and ACES?

ENFR is categorized as Energy Equities, while ACES is Alternative Energy Equities. ENFR tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ENFR and 0.55% for ACES.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.75), 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.