ERTH vs. XLG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ERTH (Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ERTH is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the MSCI Global Environment Select Index, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ERTH returned 7.44%/yr vs 17.27%/yr for XLG. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ERTH charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

ERTH vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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 higher than XLG's 7.57% return. Over the past 10 years, ERTH has underperformed XLG with an annualized return of 7.44%, while XLG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.27% annualized 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%

XLG

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: 4.22%
• YTD: 7.57%
• 6M: 7.32%
• 1Y: 28.54%
• 3Y*: 24.46%
• 5Y*: 16.24%
• 10Y*: 17.27%

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

ERTH vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ERTH Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF	8.02%	18.47%	-13.56%	0.12%	-27.59%	2.64%	51.02%	36.78%	-12.49%	30.53%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	7.57%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-24.29%	30.77%	24.15%	32.04%	-3.59%	23.04%

Correlation

The correlation between ERTH and XLG is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2006	0.71

The correlation between ERTH and XLG shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (3 years) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ERTH vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ERTH	XLG
Real Estate	26.7%	-
Industrials	21.0%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	14.3%	11.3%
Technology	10.5%	43.9%
Energy	8.5%	2.7%
Utilities	6.5%	-
Basic Materials	2.3%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	5.8%
Financial Services	0.3%	9.6%
Communication Services	-	17.1%
Healthcare	-	7.0%

Return for Risk

ERTH vs. XLG — 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

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 56
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 61
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	2.15	-0.80
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	2.92	-0.99
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.38	-0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.81	2.31	+0.50
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.79	8.66	-0.87
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. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ERTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ERTH and XLG, 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	XLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	2.15	-0.80
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.17	0.87	-1.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.33	0.92	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.62	-0.42

Drawdowns

ERTH vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ERTH drawdown since its inception was -64.45%, which is greater than XLG's maximum drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERTH and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	ERTH	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.45%	-52.39%	-12.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.07%	-12.41%	+4.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.82%	-20.70%	-13.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.72%	-28.02%	-23.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-51.72%	-30.46%	-21.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.23%	-1.44%	-25.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.47%	-7.64%	-13.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	3.30%	-0.40%

Volatility

ERTH vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) has a higher volatility of 5.20% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 3.19%. This indicates that ERTH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ERTH	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.20%	3.19%	+2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.80%	9.80%	+2.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.73%	13.33%	+3.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.85%	18.68%	+4.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.62%	18.84%	+3.78%

ERTH vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

ERTH has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

ERTH vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

ERTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, more than XLG's 0.60% 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%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.60%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ERTH and XLG in my portfolio?

ERTH and XLG have a correlation of 0.64, 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 XLG?

ERTH has higher volatility (5.20%) compared to XLG (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ERTH dropped -64.45% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, ERTH or XLG?

On 10-year performance, XLG leads with 17.27% vs 7.44% for ERTH. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ERTH or XLG?

Over the 10-year period, XLG has performed better with a 17.27% return vs 7.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ERTH or XLG?

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ERTH.

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

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.60% for XLG.

What is the main difference between ERTH and XLG?

ERTH is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while XLG is S&P 500. ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ERTH and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 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.