ICLN vs. FDFAX

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and FDFAX (Fidelity Select Consumer Staples Portfolio) are both funds - ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while FDFAX is a Consumer Staples Equities fund managed by Fidelity. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 11.67%/yr vs 6.39%/yr for FDFAX. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ICLN charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for FDFAX.

Performance

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Fidelity Select Consumer Staples Portfolio (FDFAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 27.33% return, which is significantly higher than FDFAX's 11.98% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has outperformed FDFAX with an annualized return of 11.67%, while FDFAX has yielded a comparatively lower 6.39% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -4.39%
• YTD: 27.33%
• 6M: 27.01%
• 1Y: 60.81%
• 3Y*: 5.25%
• 5Y*: -0.21%
• 10Y*: 11.67%

FDFAX

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 1.95%
• YTD: 11.98%
• 6M: 9.68%
• 1Y: 10.67%
• 3Y*: 5.96%
• 5Y*: 4.85%
• 10Y*: 6.39%

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

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	27.33%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%
FDFAX Fidelity Select Consumer Staples Portfolio	11.98%	-1.31%	5.58%	3.02%	-0.44%	14.43%	11.60%	31.79%	-15.91%	12.15%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and FDFAX 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	0.22
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.44

Over the past year, the correlation between ICLN and FDFAX has dropped to 0.02 - well below their long-term average of 0.44, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	FDFAX
Utilities	32.8%	-
Industrials	27.8%	2.4%
Energy	26.4%	-
Technology	11.1%	-
Basic Materials	1.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	0.8%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	96.8%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. FDFAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 75
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 67
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 81

FDFAX

FDFAX Risk / Return Rank: 15
FDFAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FDFAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FDFAX Omega Ratio Rank: 14
FDFAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
FDFAX Martin Ratio Rank: 11

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.

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Fidelity Select Consumer Staples Portfolio (FDFAX). 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.

	ICLN	FDFAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.17	0.83	+1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	1.27	+1.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.15	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.73	1.23	+2.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.84	2.28	+11.56

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is higher than the FDFAX Sharpe Ratio of 0.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and FDFAX, 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

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, which is greater than FDFAX's maximum drawdown of -38.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and FDFAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	FDFAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-38.29%	-48.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.38%	-9.18%	-7.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.18%	-13.03%	-30.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-15.63%	-41.53%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-27.66%	-39.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-43.03%	-2.83%	-40.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.56%	-5.04%	-61.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.41%	4.96%	-0.55%

Volatility

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 12.97% compared to Fidelity Select Consumer Staples Portfolio (FDFAX) at 4.12%. This indicates that ICLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDFAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	FDFAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.97%	4.12%	+8.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.62%	9.78%	+12.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.21%	13.60%	+14.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.55%	13.83%	+13.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.32%	14.95%	+12.37%

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than FDFAX's 0.73% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLN vs. FDFAX - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than FDFAX's 2.83% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FDFAX Fidelity Select Consumer Staples Portfolio	2.83%	6.45%	8.49%	5.13%	3.34%	10.73%	3.16%	2.78%	14.36%	8.82%	4.71%	9.06%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.28%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICLN and FDFAX in my portfolio?

ICLN and FDFAX 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.

Which is riskier, ICLN or FDFAX?

ICLN has higher volatility (12.97%) compared to FDFAX (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs FDFAX's -38.29%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 0.83), 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.