ERTH vs. ACES

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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 -5.81%/yr vs -12.89%/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

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) 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, ERTH achieves a 0.55% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 9.28% return.

ERTH

• 1D: -2.53%
• 1M: -4.42%
• YTD: 0.55%
• 6M: -0.40%
• 1Y: 13.85%
• 3Y*: 1.43%
• 5Y*: -5.81%
• 10Y*: 7.36%

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)

ERTH vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	0.55%	18.47%	-13.56%	0.12%	-27.59%	2.64%	51.02%	36.78%	-12.05%
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 ERTH and ACES is 0.83, 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	0.83
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 Jun 29, 2018	0.84

The correlation between ERTH and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

ERTH vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ERTH	ACES
Real Estate	27.4%	-
Industrials	19.2%	21.6%
Consumer Cyclical	14.0%	9.9%
Technology	10.9%	30.1%
Energy	7.1%	0.4%
Utilities	6.9%	23.8%
Basic Materials	5.3%	7.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.8%	2.5%
Financial Services	0.3%	4.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

ERTH vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank

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

ERTH

ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 27
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 22
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
ERTH Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

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.

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.

	ERTH	ACES	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.80	1.27	-0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.20	1.79	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.22	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.72	2.41	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.42	5.66	-1.24

ERTH vs. ACES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ERTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.80, which is lower than the ACES Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ERTH 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

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	ERTH	ACES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.45%	-79.05%	+14.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.07%	-17.82%	+9.75%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.26%	-63.00%	+30.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.49%	-38.99%	+17.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.14%	7.58%	-4.44%

Volatility

ERTH vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) is 6.57%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 14.00%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	ERTH	ACES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.57%	14.00%	-7.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.97%	25.21%	-12.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.34%	33.93%	-16.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.96%	36.52%	-13.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.56%	35.72%	-13.16%

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 1.93%, 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%
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	1.93%	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

Can I hold both ERTH and ACES in my portfolio?

ERTH and ACES have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ERTH or ACES?

ACES has higher volatility (14.00%) compared to ERTH (6.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERTH dropped -64.45% vs ACES's -79.05%.

Which ETF is better, ERTH or ACES?

On 5-year performance, ERTH leads with -5.81% vs -12.89% for ACES. Both ETFs have the same 0.55% expense ratio. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 6.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ERTH or ACES?

Over the 5-year period, ERTH has performed better with a -5.81% return vs -12.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ERTH or ACES?

ERTH and ACES have the same expense ratio: 0.55% per year.

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

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 0.63% for ACES.

What is the main difference between ERTH and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs 0.80), 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.