ICLN vs. XLF

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while XLF is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICLN returned 11.67%/yr vs 13.33%/yr for XLF. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICLN charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for XLF.

Performance

ICLN vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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 XLF's -2.11% return. Over the past 10 years, ICLN has underperformed XLF with an annualized return of 11.67%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively higher 13.33% annualized return.

ICLN

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -5.47%
• YTD: 27.33%
• 6M: 27.01%
• 1Y: 60.20%
• 3Y*: 5.25%
• 5Y*: -0.21%
• 10Y*: 11.67%

XLF

• 1D: 1.37%
• 1M: 4.00%
• YTD: -2.11%
• 6M: -2.09%
• 1Y: 8.41%
• 3Y*: 18.86%
• 5Y*: 9.15%
• 10Y*: 13.33%

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

ICLN vs. XLF - 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%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	-2.11%	14.90%	30.56%	12.03%	-10.59%	34.80%	-1.74%	31.88%	-13.06%	22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and XLF is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.51

Over the past year, the correlation between ICLN and XLF has dropped to 0.24 - well below their long-term average of 0.51, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

ICLN vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLN	XLF
Utilities	35.4%	-
Industrials	26.2%	0.2%
Energy	24.9%	-
Technology	10.8%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	98.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ICLN vs. XLF — 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

XLF

XLF Risk / Return Rank: 15
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 15
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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	XLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.17	0.42	+1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	0.67	+2.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.08	+0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.73	0.42	+3.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.84	1.08	+12.76

ICLN vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is higher than the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and XLF, 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. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, which is greater than XLF's maximum drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and XLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLN	XLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.15%	-82.69%	-4.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.38%	-14.79%	-1.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.18%	-15.54%	-27.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.16%	-25.81%	-31.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.75%	-42.86%	-23.89%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-43.03%	-4.94%	-38.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-66.56%	-20.01%	-46.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.41%	5.76%	-1.35%

Volatility

ICLN vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 12.97% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 4.23%. This indicates that ICLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICLN	XLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.97%	4.23%	+8.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.62%	11.26%	+11.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.21%	14.69%	+13.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.55%	18.66%	+8.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.32%	22.17%	+5.15%

ICLN vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than XLF's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLN vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than XLF's 1.49% 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%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.49%	1.31%	1.42%	1.71%	2.04%	1.63%	2.03%	1.87%	2.08%	1.48%	21.10%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICLN and XLF in my portfolio?

ICLN and XLF have a correlation of 0.24, 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 XLF?

ICLN has higher volatility (12.97%) compared to XLF (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs XLF's -82.69%.

Which ETF is better, ICLN or XLF?

On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 13.33% vs 11.67% for ICLN. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLN or XLF?

Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 13.33% return vs 11.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLN or XLF?

XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ICLN.

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

XLF has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 1.28% for ICLN.

What is the main difference between ICLN and XLF?

ICLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while XLF is Financials Equities. ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ICLN and 0.08% for XLF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 0.42), 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.