PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FRNW vs. BATT
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

FRNW vs. BATT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) and Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

FRNW vs. BATT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FRNW
Fidelity Clean Energy ETF
13.86%53.20%-21.11%-19.64%-11.46%-2.85%
BATT
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF
7.90%59.70%-13.93%-7.05%-32.25%7.48%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FRNW achieves a 13.86% return, which is significantly higher than BATT's 7.90% return.


FRNW

1D
3.77%
1M
1.51%
YTD
13.86%
6M
19.32%
1Y
82.53%
3Y*
2.45%
5Y*
10Y*

BATT

1D
4.20%
1M
-8.43%
YTD
7.90%
6M
16.74%
1Y
81.61%
3Y*
7.85%
5Y*
1.94%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


FRNW vs. BATT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FRNW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than BATT's 0.59% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

FRNW vs. BATT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FRNW
FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

BATT
BATT Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
BATT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BATT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
BATT Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
BATT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
BATT Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FRNW vs. BATT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) and Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT). 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.


FRNWBATTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.06

2.54

+0.52

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.68

2.97

+0.71

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.41

+0.06

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

6.92

4.31

+2.61

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

20.36

16.05

+4.31

FRNW vs. BATT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FRNW Sharpe Ratio is 3.06, which is comparable to the BATT Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FRNW and BATT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FRNWBATTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.06

2.54

+0.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.04

-0.05

+0.01

Correlation

The correlation between FRNW and BATT is 0.72, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

FRNW vs. BATT - Dividend Comparison

FRNW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, less than BATT's 1.72% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018
FRNW
Fidelity Clean Energy ETF
1.10%1.25%1.43%1.30%0.69%0.04%0.00%0.00%0.00%
BATT
Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF
1.72%1.85%3.17%3.23%4.14%2.32%0.21%3.22%0.89%

Drawdowns

FRNW vs. BATT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRNW drawdown since its inception was -59.37%, smaller than the maximum BATT drawdown of -69.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRNW and BATT.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


FRNWBATTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.37%

-69.38%

+10.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.58%

-18.00%

+6.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-61.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.78%

-16.31%

-1.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-34.25%

-35.41%

+1.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.94%

4.83%

-0.89%

Volatility

FRNW vs. BATT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) is 8.61%, while Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT) has a volatility of 14.03%. This indicates that FRNW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BATT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


FRNWBATTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.61%

14.03%

-5.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.58%

25.15%

-5.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.14%

32.37%

-5.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.46%

29.25%

-0.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.46%

30.55%

-2.09%