HYDR vs. FAN

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

HYDR (Global X Hydrogen ETF) and FAN (First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - HYDR tracks the Solactive Global Hydrogen Index - Benchmark TR Net while FAN tracks the ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, HYDR returned 6.18%/yr vs 14.49%/yr for FAN. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HYDR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for FAN.

Performance

HYDR vs. FAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Hydrogen ETF (HYDR) and First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HYDR achieves a 59.23% return, which is significantly higher than FAN's 20.41% return.

HYDR

• 1D: -2.65%
• 1M: -30.78%
• YTD: 59.23%
• 6M: 52.57%
• 1Y: 140.67%
• 3Y*: 6.18%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FAN

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -7.48%
• YTD: 20.41%
• 6M: 19.97%
• 1Y: 37.56%
• 3Y*: 14.49%
• 5Y*: 4.30%
• 10Y*: 10.06%

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

HYDR vs. FAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HYDR Global X Hydrogen ETF	59.23%	43.73%	-33.08%	-36.49%	-47.24%	-15.79%
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	20.41%	40.38%	-8.96%	-3.20%	-13.12%	-5.41%

Correlation

The correlation between HYDR and FAN is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2021	0.65

The correlation between HYDR and FAN shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.65 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HYDR vs. FAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HYDR	FAN
Industrials	81.1%	41.3%
Consumer Cyclical	5.7%	1.7%
Basic Materials	4.5%	0.3%
Energy	1.2%	1.1%
Technology	0.7%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	55.7%

Return for Risk

HYDR vs. FAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

HYDR

HYDR Risk / Return Rank: 79
HYDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
HYDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
HYDR Omega Ratio Rank: 72
HYDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
HYDR Martin Ratio Rank: 65

FAN

FAN Risk / Return Rank: 66
FAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
FAN Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
FAN Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

HYDR vs. FAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Hydrogen ETF (HYDR) and First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN). 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.

	HYDR	FAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.55	1.85	+0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	2.50	+0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.31	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.57	3.39	+1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.11	10.89	-0.78

HYDR vs. FAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HYDR Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is higher than the FAN Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HYDR and FAN, 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

HYDR vs. FAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HYDR drawdown since its inception was -89.28%, which is greater than FAN's maximum drawdown of -79.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HYDR and FAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	HYDR	FAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.28%	-79.94%	-9.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.99%	-11.13%	-19.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-70.32%	-24.46%	-45.86%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-38.45%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-63.44%	-9.48%	-53.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-64.12%	-45.06%	-19.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.97%	3.46%	+10.51%

Volatility

HYDR vs. FAN - Volatility Comparison

Global X Hydrogen ETF (HYDR) has a higher volatility of 16.94% compared to First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF (FAN) at 6.63%. This indicates that HYDR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HYDR	FAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.94%	6.63%	+10.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.70%	15.96%	+22.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	55.54%	20.38%	+35.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.51%	21.41%	+26.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.51%	20.95%	+26.56%

HYDR vs. FAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

HYDR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FAN's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

HYDR vs. FAN - Dividend Comparison

HYDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than FAN's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FAN First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF	1.39%	1.35%	1.52%	1.71%	1.50%	1.79%	0.84%	2.42%	2.67%	2.59%	6.04%	2.35%
HYDR Global X Hydrogen ETF	2.40%	3.82%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HYDR and FAN in my portfolio?

HYDR and FAN have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HYDR or FAN?

HYDR has higher volatility (16.94%) compared to FAN (6.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HYDR dropped -89.28% vs FAN's -79.94%.

Which ETF is better, HYDR or FAN?

On 3-year performance, FAN leads with 14.49% vs 6.18% for HYDR. On fees, HYDR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FAN has been the lower-risk option at 6.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HYDR or FAN?

Over the 3-year period, FAN has performed better with a 14.49% return vs 6.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HYDR or FAN?

HYDR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for FAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HYDR or FAN?

HYDR has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 1.39% for FAN.

What is the main difference between HYDR and FAN?

HYDR tracks Solactive Global Hydrogen Index - Benchmark TR Net, while FAN tracks ISE Clean Edge Global Wind Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for HYDR and 0.62% for FAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HYDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.85), 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.