ERTH vs. ACES
ERTH (Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - ERTH tracks the MSCI Global Environment Select Index while ACES tracks the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ERTH returned -3.76%/yr vs -8.73%/yr for ACES. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.55% expense ratio.
Performance
ERTH vs. ACES - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ERTH achieves a 8.02% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 28.72% return.
ERTH
- 1D
- -1.09%
- 1M
- 3.19%
- YTD
- 8.02%
- 6M
- 9.21%
- 1Y
- 22.54%
- 3Y*
- 3.35%
- 5Y*
- -3.76%
- 10Y*
- 7.44%
ACES
- 1D
- -2.84%
- 1M
- 17.92%
- YTD
- 28.72%
- 6M
- 27.36%
- 1Y
- 69.96%
- 3Y*
- -1.21%
- 5Y*
- -8.73%
- 10Y*
- —
ERTH vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF | 8.02% | 18.47% | -13.56% | 0.12% | -27.59% | 2.64% | 51.02% | 36.78% | -12.59% |
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 ERTH and ACES is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018 | 0.84 |
The correlation between ERTH and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
ERTH vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ERTH
ACES
Real Estate
-
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Communication Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
ERTH
ACES
-
Industrials
ERTH
ACES
Consumer Cyclical
ERTH
ACES
Technology
ERTH
ACES
Energy
ERTH
ACES
Utilities
ERTH
ACES
Basic Materials
ERTH
ACES
Consumer Defensive
ERTH
ACES
Financial Services
ERTH
ACES
Communication Services
ERTH
-
ACES
-
Healthcare
ERTH
-
ACES
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ERTH vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank
ERTH
ACES
ERTH vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) 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.
| ERTH | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.36 | 2.18 | -0.82 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.93 | 2.77 | -0.85 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.33 | -0.09 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.81 | 4.03 | -1.23 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.79 | 10.16 | -2.37 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ERTH | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.36 | 2.18 | -0.82 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.17 | -0.24 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.21 | 0.22 | -0.01 |
Drawdowns
ERTH vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ERTH drawdown since its inception was -64.45%, smaller than the maximum ACES drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERTH and ACES.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ERTH | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.45% | -79.05% | +14.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.07% | -17.44% | +9.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.82% | -58.68% | +24.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -51.72% | -74.44% | +22.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.23% | -56.41% | +29.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.47% | -38.87% | +17.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.90% | 6.91% | -4.01% |
Volatility
ERTH vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) is 5.20%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 9.99%. This indicates that ERTH 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ERTH | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.20% | 9.99% | -4.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.80% | 22.55% | -10.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.73% | 32.42% | -15.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.85% | 36.17% | -13.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.62% | 35.59% | -12.97% |
ERTH vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both ERTH and ACES have an expense ratio of 0.55%.
Dividends
ERTH vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison
ERTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, 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% |
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF | 1.38% | 1.46% | 1.00% | 1.28% | 1.22% | 15.33% | 0.21% | 0.71% | 0.61% | 0.87% | 1.06% | 0.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ERTH and ACES have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACES has higher volatility (9.99%) compared to ERTH (5.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERTH dropped -64.45% vs ACES's -79.05%.
On 5-year performance, ERTH leads with -3.76% vs -8.73% for ACES. Both ETFs have the same 0.55% expense ratio. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 5.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ERTH has performed better with a -3.76% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ERTH and ACES have the same expense ratio: 0.55% per year.
ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.54% for ACES.
ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index, while ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and SS&C.
ACES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.36), 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.
Find the right allocation for ERTH and ACES
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer