ICLN vs. ITB

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and ITB (iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while ITB is a Building & Construction fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 11.27%/yr vs 13.61%/yr for ITB. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ICLN charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for ITB.

Performance

ICLN vs. ITB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 27.81% return, which is significantly higher than ITB's -3.71% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has underperformed ITB with an annualized return of 11.27%, while ITB has yielded a comparatively higher 13.61% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: -1.50%
• 1M: -0.76%
• YTD: 27.81%
• 6M: 26.73%
• 1Y: 65.16%
• 3Y*: 5.80%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: 11.27%

ITB

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -0.48%
• YTD: -3.71%
• 6M: -7.66%
• 1Y: 3.31%
• 3Y*: 6.44%
• 5Y*: 6.84%
• 10Y*: 13.61%

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

ICLN vs. ITB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	27.81%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF	-3.71%	-5.26%	2.06%	68.91%	-26.26%	49.25%	26.42%	48.70%	-30.92%	59.65%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and ITB is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.45
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.48

The correlation between ICLN and ITB shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (1 year) to 0.48 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ICLN vs. ITB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	ITB
Utilities	32.8%	-
Industrials	27.8%	19.1%
Energy	26.4%	-
Technology	11.1%	-
Basic Materials	1.1%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	71.8%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. ITB — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 80
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 85

ITB

ITB Risk / Return Rank: 11
ITB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
ITB Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
ITB Omega Ratio Rank: 12
ITB Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
ITB Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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. ITB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB). 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.

	ICLN	ITB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.38	0.11	+2.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	0.42	+2.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.05	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.66	0.13	+5.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.11	0.25	+15.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ICLN vs. ITB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.38, which is higher than the ITB Sharpe Ratio of 0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and ITB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ICLN	ITB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.38	0.11	+2.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.00	0.24	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41	0.46	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.09	0.11	-0.20

Drawdowns

ICLN vs. ITB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, roughly equal to the maximum ITB drawdown of -86.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and ITB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	ITB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-86.53%	-0.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.58%	-26.04%	+14.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.18%	-33.35%	-9.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-40.55%	-16.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-52.10%	-14.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.82%	-27.00%	-15.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.59%	-37.10%	-29.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.06%	13.28%	-9.22%

Volatility

ICLN vs. ITB - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 12.28% compared to iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) at 7.16%. This indicates that ICLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ITB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	ITB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.28%	7.16%	+5.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.81%	20.24%	+1.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.62%	29.41%	-1.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.43%	29.19%	-1.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.31%	30.00%	-2.69%

ICLN vs. ITB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than ITB's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLN vs. ITB - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, more than ITB's 1.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
ITB iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF	1.23%	1.67%	0.46%	0.48%	0.86%	0.37%	0.46%	0.50%	0.63%	0.28%	0.43%	0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICLN and ITB in my portfolio?

ICLN and ITB have a correlation of 0.28, 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 ITB?

ICLN has higher volatility (12.28%) compared to ITB (7.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs ITB's -86.53%.

Which ETF is better, ICLN or ITB?

On 10-year performance, ITB leads with 13.61% vs 11.27% for ICLN. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ITB has been the lower-risk option at 7.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLN or ITB?

Over the 10-year period, ITB has performed better with a 13.61% return vs 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLN or ITB?

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for ITB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ICLN or ITB?

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 1.23% for ITB.

What is the main difference between ICLN and ITB?

ICLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while ITB is Building & Construction. ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while ITB tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ICLN and 0.42% for ITB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 0.11), 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.