ICLN vs. PBW

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW).

ICLN and PBW are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. ICLN is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. It was launched on Jun 24, 2008. PBW is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). It was launched on Mar 3, 2005. Both ICLN and PBW are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

ICLN vs. PBW - Performance Comparison

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

ICLN vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	11.32%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	3.51%	53.96%	-30.77%	-20.03%	-44.55%	-29.86%	204.82%	62.58%	-14.11%	39.92%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 11.32% return, which is significantly higher than PBW's 3.51% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has outperformed PBW with an annualized return of 8.96%, while PBW has yielded a comparatively lower 6.57% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: 4.45%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 11.32%
• 6M: 19.07%
• 1Y: 63.12%
• 3Y*: -0.97%
• 5Y*: -4.11%
• 10Y*: 8.96%

PBW

• 1D: 4.99%
• 1M: -2.46%
• YTD: 3.51%
• 6M: 9.88%
• 1Y: 102.59%
• 3Y*: -6.15%
• 5Y*: -18.62%
• 10Y*: 6.57%

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

ICLN vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.

PBW

Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF

ICLN

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 95
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 92
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 93
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 88
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. PBW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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	PBW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.43	2.41	+0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	2.91	+0.15
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.35	+0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.49	4.66	+0.83
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.39	12.87	+2.52
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. PBW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the PBW Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and PBW, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ICLN	PBW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.43	2.41	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.15	-0.44	+0.28
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.33	0.17	+0.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.12	-0.07	-0.04

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and PBW is 0.78, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

ICLN vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, more than PBW's 0.86% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.46%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	0.86%	0.79%	2.84%	3.68%	4.21%	1.71%	0.44%	1.45%	2.04%	1.28%	2.68%	1.53%

Drawdowns

ICLN vs. PBW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, roughly equal to the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and PBW.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	PBW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-89.02%	+1.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.22%	-21.24%	+10.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-84.98%	+27.82%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-89.02%	+22.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.20%	-73.91%	+23.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.84%	-62.86%	-3.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.00%	7.70%	-3.70%

Volatility

ICLN vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) is 10.82%, while Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a volatility of 12.60%. This indicates that ICLN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	PBW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.82%	12.60%	-1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.46%	31.89%	-11.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.17%	42.85%	-16.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.16%	42.94%	-15.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.04%	38.49%	-11.45%