PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GCED.L vs. MLPS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist (GCED.L) and Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GCED.L achieves a 35.99% return, which is significantly higher than MLPS.L's 18.77% return.


GCED.L

1D
-0.91%
1M
2.39%
YTD
35.99%
6M
37.39%
1Y
86.86%
3Y*
8.06%
5Y*
-4.51%
10Y*

MLPS.L

1D
-0.63%
1M
-0.14%
YTD
18.77%
6M
14.57%
1Y
15.67%
3Y*
18.83%
5Y*
17.28%
10Y*
6.96%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
GCED.L
Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist
35.99%41.92%-26.55%-10.54%-30.72%-22.60%
MLPS.L
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF
18.77%2.44%22.62%19.38%31.92%11.93%

Correlation

The correlation between GCED.L and MLPS.L is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.02

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.28

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2021

0.37

The correlation between GCED.L and MLPS.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.38 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GCED.L
MLPS.L

Industrials

48.1%
0.2%

Utilities

16.2%
3.2%

Energy

13.0%
96.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%

-

Technology

6.8%

-

Basic Materials

3.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

0.9%

-

Financial Services

0.9%

-

Communication Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Industrials

GCED.L
48.1%
MLPS.L
0.2%

Utilities

GCED.L
16.2%
MLPS.L
3.2%

Energy

GCED.L
13.0%
MLPS.L
96.7%

Consumer Cyclical

GCED.L
10.0%
MLPS.L

-

Technology

GCED.L
6.8%
MLPS.L

-

Basic Materials

GCED.L
3.4%
MLPS.L

-

Consumer Defensive

GCED.L
0.9%
MLPS.L

-

Financial Services

GCED.L
0.9%
MLPS.L

-

Communication Services

GCED.L

-

MLPS.L

-

Healthcare

GCED.L

-

MLPS.L

-

Real Estate

GCED.L

-

MLPS.L

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GCED.L
GCED.L Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
GCED.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GCED.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
GCED.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
GCED.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
GCED.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank

MLPS.L
MLPS.L Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
MLPS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MLPS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
MLPS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
MLPS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
MLPS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
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.

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist (GCED.L) and Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPS.L). 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.


GCED.LMLPS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.19

+0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.61

1.85

+5.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

25.61

4.78

+20.84

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GCED.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.78, which is higher than the MLPS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GCED.L and MLPS.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GCED.LMLPS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.78

1.10

+2.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.16

0.85

-1.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.25

0.15

-0.39

Drawdowns

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GCED.L drawdown since its inception was -72.10%, smaller than the maximum MLPS.L drawdown of -82.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GCED.L and MLPS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GCED.LMLPS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-72.10%

-82.23%

+10.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.35%

-8.45%

-2.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-53.20%

-17.67%

-35.53%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-69.88%

-21.76%

-48.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-31.99%

-3.27%

-28.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-44.83%

-28.25%

-16.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.38%

3.27%

+0.11%

Volatility

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist (GCED.L) has a higher volatility of 9.12% compared to Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF (MLPS.L) at 5.31%. This indicates that GCED.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MLPS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GCED.LMLPS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.12%

5.31%

+3.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.01%

10.80%

+5.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.89%

14.13%

+8.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.32%

20.41%

+7.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.87%

28.54%

+0.33%

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GCED.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than MLPS.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

GCED.L vs. MLPS.L - Dividend Comparison

GCED.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, while MLPS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
GCED.L
Invesco Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF Dist
1.53%2.09%1.43%0.68%0.09%0.20%
MLPS.L
Invesco Morningstar US Energy Infrastructure MLP UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GCED.L and MLPS.L have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MLPS.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MLPS.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GCED.L.

GCED.L tracks WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation Index, while MLPS.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for GCED.L and 0.50% for MLPS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GCED.L and MLPS.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer