ERTH vs. IBAT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

ERTH (Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF) and IBAT (iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - ERTH tracks the MSCI Global Environment Select Index while IBAT tracks the STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ERTH returned 25.31% vs 129.08% for IBAT. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ERTH charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBAT.

Performance

ERTH vs. IBAT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ERTH achieves a 9.21% return, which is significantly lower than IBAT's 66.56% return.

ERTH

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: 3.37%
• YTD: 9.21%
• 6M: 10.41%
• 1Y: 25.31%
• 3Y*: 3.73%
• 5Y*: -3.27%
• 10Y*: 7.56%

IBAT

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: 10.63%
• YTD: 66.56%
• 6M: 60.29%
• 1Y: 129.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ERTH vs. IBAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	9.21%	18.47%	-3.05%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	66.56%	32.09%	-13.19%

Correlation

The correlation between ERTH and IBAT is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024	0.78

The correlation between ERTH and IBAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

ERTH vs. IBAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ERTH	IBAT
Real Estate	26.7%	-
Industrials	21.0%	41.6%
Consumer Cyclical	14.3%	1.9%
Technology	10.5%	23.4%
Energy	8.5%	3.4%
Utilities	6.5%	0.4%
Basic Materials	2.3%	29.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	-
Financial Services	0.3%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

ERTH vs. IBAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ERTH

ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 47
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
ERTH Martin Ratio Rank: 50

IBAT

IBAT Risk / Return Rank: 96
IBAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
IBAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
IBAT Omega Ratio Rank: 94
IBAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
IBAT Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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. IBAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) and iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT). 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	IBAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	4.94	-3.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.14	5.26	-3.12
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.70	-0.44
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	10.66	-7.58
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.58	28.14	-19.56
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. IBAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ERTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is lower than the IBAT Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ERTH and IBAT, 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	IBAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.52	4.94	-3.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.14	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.34	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	1.45	-1.24

Drawdowns

ERTH vs. IBAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ERTH drawdown since its inception was -64.45%, which is greater than IBAT's maximum drawdown of -28.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERTH and IBAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ERTH	IBAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.45%	-28.26%	-36.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.07%	-12.25%	+4.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.82%	—	—
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	-26.43%	-0.02%	-26.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.47%	-7.75%	-13.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	4.64%	-1.74%

Volatility

ERTH vs. IBAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) is 5.16%, while iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT) has a volatility of 10.17%. This indicates that ERTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ERTH	IBAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.16%	10.17%	-5.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.78%	20.32%	-8.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.69%	26.31%	-9.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.85%	23.83%	-0.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.62%	23.83%	-1.21%

ERTH vs. IBAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ERTH has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IBAT's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

ERTH vs. IBAT - Dividend Comparison

ERTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, more than IBAT's 0.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	1.37%	1.46%	1.00%	1.28%	1.22%	15.33%	0.21%	0.71%	0.61%	0.87%	1.06%	0.79%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	0.69%	1.15%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ERTH and IBAT in my portfolio?

ERTH and IBAT have a correlation of 0.77, 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 IBAT?

IBAT has higher volatility (10.17%) compared to ERTH (5.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERTH dropped -64.45% vs IBAT's -28.26%.

Which ETF is better, ERTH or IBAT?

On 1-year performance, IBAT leads with 129.08% vs 25.31% for ERTH. On fees, IBAT is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 5.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ERTH or IBAT?

Over the 1-year period, IBAT has performed better with a 129.08% return vs 25.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ERTH or IBAT?

IBAT is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ERTH.

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

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 0.69% for IBAT.

What is the main difference between ERTH and IBAT?

ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index, while IBAT tracks STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ERTH and 0.47% for IBAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.52), 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.