ERTH vs. FRNW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ERTH (Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF) and FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds. ERTH is passively managed, while FRNW is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ERTH returned 3.35%/yr vs 10.12%/yr for FRNW. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ERTH charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FRNW.

Performance

ERTH vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ERTH achieves a 8.02% return, which is significantly lower than FRNW's 34.11% 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%

FRNW

• 1D: -1.91%
• 1M: 7.89%
• YTD: 34.11%
• 6M: 34.18%
• 1Y: 86.03%
• 3Y*: 10.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ERTH vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	8.02%	18.47%	-13.56%	0.12%	-27.59%	5.14%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	34.11%	53.20%	-21.11%	-19.64%	-11.46%	-2.85%

Correlation

The correlation between ERTH and FRNW is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2021	0.87

The correlation between ERTH and FRNW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

ERTH vs. FRNW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ERTH	FRNW
Real Estate	26.7%	-
Industrials	21.0%	30.1%
Consumer Cyclical	14.3%	-
Technology	10.5%	5.5%
Energy	8.5%	21.0%
Utilities	6.5%	43.3%
Basic Materials	2.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-
Financial Services	0.3%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

ERTH vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

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

ERTH

ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 43
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 36
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
ERTH Martin Ratio Rank: 47

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 90
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). 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	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	3.39	-2.03
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	4.06	-2.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.51	-0.27
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.81	7.47	-4.67
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.79	23.29	-15.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ERTH vs. FRNW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ERTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the FRNW Sharpe Ratio of 3.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ERTH and FRNW, 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

	ERTH	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	3.39	-2.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.17	—	—
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	0.09	+0.12

Drawdowns

ERTH vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ERTH drawdown since its inception was -64.45%, which is greater than FRNW's maximum drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERTH and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	ERTH	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.45%	-59.37%	-5.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.07%	-11.58%	+3.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.82%	-45.27%	+11.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.23%	-3.15%	-24.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.47%	-33.33%	+11.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	3.71%	-0.81%

Volatility

ERTH vs. FRNW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) is 5.20%, while Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) has a volatility of 8.16%. This indicates that ERTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRNW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ERTH	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.20%	8.16%	-2.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.80%	17.79%	-5.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	25.61%	-8.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.85%	28.35%	-5.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.62%	28.35%	-5.73%

ERTH vs. FRNW - Expense Ratio Comparison

ERTH has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than FRNW's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

ERTH vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

ERTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, more than FRNW's 0.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	0.94%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ERTH and FRNW in my portfolio?

ERTH and FRNW have a correlation of 0.82, 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 FRNW?

FRNW has higher volatility (8.16%) compared to ERTH (5.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERTH dropped -64.45% vs FRNW's -59.37%.

Which ETF is better, ERTH or FRNW?

On 3-year performance, FRNW leads with 10.12% vs 3.35% for ERTH. On fees, FRNW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, ERTH or FRNW?

Over the 3-year period, FRNW has performed better with a 10.12% return vs 3.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ERTH or FRNW?

FRNW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ERTH.

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

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.94% for FRNW.

What is the main difference between ERTH and FRNW?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ERTH and 0.39% for FRNW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FRNW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.39 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.