IBAT vs. HJEN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBAT (iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF) and HJEN (Direxion Hydrogen ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - IBAT tracks the STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials while HJEN tracks the Indxx Hydrogen Economy Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBAT charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for HJEN.

Performance

IBAT vs. HJEN - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

IBAT

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: 10.03%
• YTD: 64.52%
• 6M: 57.93%
• 1Y: 124.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HJEN

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBAT vs. HJEN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	64.52%	32.09%	-13.19%
HJEN Direxion Hydrogen ETF	0.00%	0.00%	-0.38%

Correlation

The correlation between IBAT and HJEN is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2024	0.19

IBAT vs. HJEN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IBAT	HJEN
Industrials	41.6%	31.7%
Basic Materials	29.0%	9.2%
Technology	23.4%	7.6%
Energy	3.4%	8.3%
Consumer Cyclical	1.9%	-
Utilities	0.4%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	3.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

IBAT vs. HJEN — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBAT

IBAT Risk / Return Rank: 95
IBAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
IBAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
IBAT Omega Ratio Rank: 94
IBAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
IBAT Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

IBAT vs. HJEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT) and Direxion Hydrogen ETF (HJEN). 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.

	IBAT	HJEN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.75	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	5.12	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.68	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.21	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	26.91	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBAT	HJEN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.41	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	IBAT	HJEN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.26%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.25%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.74%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.64%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBAT	HJEN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.25%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.28%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.35%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.83%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.83%	—	—

IBAT vs. HJEN - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBAT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than HJEN's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBAT vs. HJEN - Dividend Comparison

IBAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, while HJEN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HJEN Direxion Hydrogen ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.91%	1.50%	1.24%	0.76%
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF	0.70%	1.15%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBAT and HJEN in my portfolio?

IBAT and HJEN have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IBAT or HJEN?

On fees, HJEN is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBAT or HJEN?

HJEN is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for IBAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBAT or HJEN?

IBAT has the higher dividend yield at 0.70%, compared with 0.00% for HJEN.

What is the main difference between IBAT and HJEN?

IBAT tracks STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials, while HJEN tracks Indxx Hydrogen Economy Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Direxion. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBAT and 0.45% for HJEN.