FRNW vs. IBAT

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) and iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT).

FRNW and IBAT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FRNW is an actively managed fund by Fidelity. It was launched on Oct 5, 2021. IBAT is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials. It was launched on Mar 19, 2024.

Performance

FRNW vs. IBAT - Performance Comparison

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

FRNW vs. IBAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	13.86%	53.20%	-7.12%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	18.93%	32.09%	-13.19%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FRNW achieves a 13.86% return, which is significantly lower than IBAT's 18.93% return.

FRNW

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

IBAT

• 1D: 3.41%
• 1M: -5.33%
• YTD: 18.93%
• 6M: 21.28%
• 1Y: 63.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FRNW vs. IBAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FRNW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than IBAT's 0.47% expense ratio.

IBAT

iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF

FRNW

Fidelity Clean Energy ETF

Return for Risk

FRNW vs. IBAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 97
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 97

IBAT

IBAT Risk / Return Rank: 94
IBAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
IBAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
IBAT Omega Ratio Rank: 92
IBAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
IBAT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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. IBAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) 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.

	FRNW	IBAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.06	2.47	+0.59
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.68	3.04	+0.64
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.41	+0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.92	4.62	+2.30
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.36	12.36	+7.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FRNW vs. IBAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FRNW Sharpe Ratio is 3.06, which is comparable to the IBAT Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FRNW and IBAT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FRNW	IBAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.06	2.47	+0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.04	0.73	-0.77

Correlation

The correlation between FRNW and IBAT is 0.76, 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. IBAT - Dividend Comparison

FRNW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, more than IBAT's 0.97% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	1.10%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	0.97%	1.15%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

FRNW vs. IBAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRNW drawdown since its inception was -59.37%, which is greater than IBAT's maximum drawdown of -28.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRNW and IBAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FRNW	IBAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.37%	-28.26%	-31.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.58%	-13.12%	+1.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.78%	-7.49%	-10.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-34.25%	-8.28%	-25.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.94%	4.90%	-0.96%

Volatility

FRNW vs. IBAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) is 8.61%, while iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT) has a volatility of 10.76%. This indicates that FRNW 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

	FRNW	IBAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.61%	10.76%	-2.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.58%	20.10%	-0.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.14%	25.78%	+1.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.46%	22.85%	+5.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.46%	22.85%	+5.61%