EQL vs. ACES

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EQL (ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EQL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the NYSE Equal Sector Weight 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, EQL returned 10.58%/yr vs -12.89%/yr for ACES. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EQL charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ACES.

Performance

EQL vs. ACES - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) 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, EQL achieves a 8.44% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 9.28% return.

EQL

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: -0.97%
• YTD: 8.44%
• 6M: 7.90%
• 1Y: 17.48%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: 10.58%
• 10Y*: 12.66%

ACES

• 1D: -4.61%
• 1M: -9.51%
• YTD: 9.28%
• 6M: 4.82%
• 1Y: 42.77%
• 3Y*: -5.11%
• 5Y*: -12.89%
• 10Y*: —

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

EQL vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	8.44%	13.09%	16.44%	16.87%	-10.72%	29.32%	10.87%	27.87%	-6.70%
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	9.28%	25.44%	-26.71%	-20.04%	-28.44%	-19.44%	140.33%	51.70%	-9.81%

Correlation

The correlation between EQL and ACES is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2018	0.62

The correlation between EQL and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

EQL vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EQL	ACES
Technology	12.3%	30.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	9.9%
Real Estate	9.2%	-
Communication Services	8.8%	-
Healthcare	8.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	8.6%	2.5%
Financial Services	8.6%	4.4%
Industrials	8.5%	21.6%
Utilities	8.4%	23.8%
Energy	8.0%	0.4%
Basic Materials	8.0%	7.3%

Return for Risk

EQL vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQL

EQL Risk / Return Rank: 58
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 54
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 63

ACES

ACES Risk / Return Rank: 39
ACES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
ACES Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
ACES Omega Ratio Rank: 34
ACES Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
ACES Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

EQL vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) 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.

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.

	EQL	ACES	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	1.27	+0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	1.79	+0.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.22	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	2.41	+0.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.95	5.66	+5.29

EQL vs. ACES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQL Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is higher than the ACES Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQL 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.

Drawdowns

EQL vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQL drawdown since its inception was -35.65%, smaller than the maximum ACES drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQL and ACES.

Drawdown Indicators

	EQL	ACES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.65%	-79.05%	+43.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-17.82%	+11.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.07%	-58.68%	+43.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.24%	-74.44%	+55.20%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.65%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.76%	-63.00%	+61.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.25%	-38.99%	+35.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.60%	7.58%	-5.98%

Volatility

EQL vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) is 3.08%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 14.00%. This indicates that EQL 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

	EQL	ACES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.08%	14.00%	-10.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.20%	25.21%	-18.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.59%	33.93%	-24.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.56%	36.52%	-21.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.54%	35.72%	-19.18%

EQL vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQL has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than ACES's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

EQL vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison

EQL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, more than ACES's 0.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	0.63%	0.70%	1.10%	1.44%	1.08%	0.71%	0.56%	1.79%	0.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	1.63%	1.73%	1.78%	1.96%	2.14%	1.69%	2.29%	1.95%	2.39%	1.97%	2.89%	2.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EQL and ACES in my portfolio?

EQL and ACES have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EQL or ACES?

ACES has higher volatility (14.00%) compared to EQL (3.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQL dropped -35.65% vs ACES's -79.05%.

Which ETF is better, EQL or ACES?

On 5-year performance, EQL leads with 10.58% vs -12.89% for ACES. On fees, EQL is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, EQL has been the lower-risk option at 3.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EQL or ACES?

Over the 5-year period, EQL has performed better with a 10.58% return vs -12.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EQL or ACES?

EQL is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ACES.

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

EQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.63% for ACES.

What is the main difference between EQL and ACES?

EQL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ACES is Alternative Energy Equities. EQL tracks NYSE Equal Sector Weight Index, while ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for EQL and 0.55% for ACES.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.27), 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.