ICLN vs. TAN

Last updated Jul 30, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and TAN (Invesco Solar ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - ICLN tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy Index while TAN tracks the MAC Global Solar Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 8.12%/yr vs 9.23%/yr for TAN. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. ICLN charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for TAN.

Performance

ICLN vs. TAN - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 2.95% return, which is significantly higher than TAN's -2.93% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has underperformed TAN with an annualized return of 8.12%, while TAN has yielded a comparatively higher 9.23% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: -1.92%
• 1M: -15.14%
• 6M: -11.11%
• YTD: 2.95%
• 1Y: 24.16%
• 3Y*: -0.98%
• 5Y*: -4.52%
• 10Y*: 8.12%
• ALL TIME*: -4.14%

TAN

• 1D: -2.89%
• 1M: -17.22%
• 6M: -16.88%
• YTD: -2.93%
• 1Y: 24.10%
• 3Y*: -11.10%
• 5Y*: -10.95%
• 10Y*: 9.23%
• ALL TIME*: -7.30%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	$86.79M	$86.16M	$120.19M
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	$55.33M	$50.06M	$87.02M

ICLN vs. TAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	2.95%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	-2.93%	48.31%	-37.61%	-26.79%	-5.24%	-25.10%	233.96%	66.53%	-25.67%	54.38%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and TAN is 0.86, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.91
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.85

The correlation between ICLN and TAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

ICLN vs. TAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	TAN
Utilities	40.4%	4.6%
Technology	24.7%	29.4%
Industrials	22.8%	2.4%
Energy	8.9%	19.8%
Basic Materials	1.6%	-
Financial Services	0.1%	4.0%
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. TAN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 30
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 29
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 31

TAN

TAN Risk / Return Rank: 25
TAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
TAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
TAN Omega Ratio Rank: 25
TAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
TAN Martin Ratio Rank: 26

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ICLN vs. TAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN). 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	TAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.80	0.62	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.24	1.12	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.13	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.84	0.68	+0.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.06	2.31	+0.76

ICLN vs. TAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 0.80, which is comparable to the TAN Sharpe Ratio of 0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and TAN, 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. TAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, smaller than the maximum TAN drawdown of -95.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and TAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	TAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-95.29%	+8.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.78%	-35.51%	+6.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-40.82%	-61.80%	+20.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-73.95%	+16.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-78.53%	+11.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-53.94%	-78.10%	+24.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.43%	-78.45%	+12.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.91%	10.51%	-2.60%

Volatility

ICLN vs. TAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) is 10.03%, while Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) has a volatility of 11.39%. This indicates that ICLN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	TAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.03%	11.39%	-1.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.07%	29.57%	-4.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.25%	39.02%	-8.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.97%	40.11%	-12.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.48%	38.25%	-10.77%

ICLN vs. TAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than TAN's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLN vs. TAN - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, while TAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.09%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
TAN Invesco Solar ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.50%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.09%	0.30%	0.69%	1.77%	5.04%	1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICLN and TAN in my portfolio?

ICLN and TAN have a correlation of 0.86, 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 TAN?

TAN has higher volatility (11.39%) compared to ICLN (10.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs TAN's -95.29%.

Which ETF is better, ICLN or TAN?

On 10-year performance, TAN leads with 9.23% vs 8.12% for ICLN. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ICLN has been the lower-risk option at 10.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLN or TAN?

Over the 10-year period, TAN has performed better with a 9.23% return vs 8.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLN or TAN?

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for TAN.

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

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.00% for TAN.

What is the main difference between ICLN and TAN?

ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while TAN tracks MAC Global Solar Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ICLN and 0.69% for TAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 vs 0.62), 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.