EWY vs. FRNW

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

EWY (iShares MSCI South Korea ETF) and FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWY is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Korea Index, while FRNW is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. EWY is passively managed, while FRNW is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, EWY returned 50.62%/yr vs 6.49%/yr for FRNW. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWY charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FRNW.

Performance

EWY vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI South Korea ETF (EWY) 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, EWY achieves a 117.50% return, which is significantly higher than FRNW's 23.62% return.

EWY

• 1D: 7.09%
• 1M: 18.22%
• YTD: 117.50%
• 6M: 133.15%
• 1Y: 225.50%
• 3Y*: 50.62%
• 5Y*: 20.64%
• 10Y*: 17.58%

FRNW

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: -4.24%
• YTD: 23.62%
• 6M: 23.50%
• 1Y: 63.53%
• 3Y*: 6.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EWY vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EWY iShares MSCI South Korea ETF	117.50%	95.33%	-20.48%	19.05%	-26.59%	3.04%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	23.62%	53.20%	-21.11%	-19.64%	-11.46%	-2.52%

Correlation

The correlation between EWY and FRNW is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2021	0.54

The correlation between EWY and FRNW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWY vs. FRNW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWY	FRNW
Technology	57.4%	6.0%
Industrials	14.5%	28.7%
Financial Services	9.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	-
Healthcare	3.1%	-
Communication Services	2.7%	-
Basic Materials	2.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.8%	-
Energy	0.7%	22.5%
Utilities	0.4%	42.5%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EWY vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWY

EWY Risk / Return Rank: 96
EWY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
EWY Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EWY Omega Ratio Rank: 94
EWY Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
EWY Martin Ratio Rank: 96

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 79
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 69
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

EWY vs. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI South Korea ETF (EWY) 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.

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.

	EWY	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.84	2.37	+2.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.39	2.98	+1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.37	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.84	4.50	+5.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	34.39	15.55	+18.84

EWY vs. FRNW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWY Sharpe Ratio is 4.84, which is higher than the FRNW Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWY 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.

Drawdowns

EWY vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWY drawdown since its inception was -74.14%, which is greater than FRNW's maximum drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWY and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWY	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-74.14%	-59.37%	-14.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.08%	-14.20%	-8.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.36%	-45.14%	+17.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.55%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.42%	-10.73%	+8.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.11%	-33.15%	+13.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.59%	4.10%	+2.49%

Volatility

EWY vs. FRNW - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI South Korea ETF (EWY) has a higher volatility of 26.48% compared to Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) at 10.63%. This indicates that EWY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRNW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EWY	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	26.48%	10.63%	+15.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	43.04%	19.59%	+23.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.01%	26.98%	+20.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.33%	28.51%	+1.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.15%	28.51%	-0.36%

EWY vs. FRNW - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWY has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FRNW's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWY vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

EWY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, less than FRNW's 1.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EWY iShares MSCI South Korea ETF	0.96%	2.10%	2.55%	2.52%	1.23%	2.16%	0.73%	2.10%	1.34%	2.90%	1.21%	2.42%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	1.02%	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 EWY and FRNW in my portfolio?

EWY and FRNW have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWY or FRNW?

EWY has higher volatility (26.48%) compared to FRNW (10.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWY dropped -74.14% vs FRNW's -59.37%.

Which ETF is better, EWY or FRNW?

On 3-year performance, EWY leads with 50.62% vs 6.49% for FRNW. On fees, FRNW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FRNW has been the lower-risk option at 10.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EWY or FRNW?

Over the 3-year period, EWY has performed better with a 50.62% return vs 6.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWY or FRNW?

FRNW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EWY.

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

FRNW has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.96% for EWY.

What is the main difference between EWY and FRNW?

EWY is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while FRNW is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for EWY and 0.39% for FRNW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EWY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.84 vs 2.37), 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.