INRG.L vs. XLES.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

INRG.L (iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and XLES.L (Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc) are both Energy Equities funds - INRG.L tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD while XLES.L tracks the S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, INRG.L returned 12.64%/yr vs 10.15%/yr for XLES.L. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INRG.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLES.L.

Performance

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) and Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLES.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

INRG.L is traded in GBp, while XLES.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XLES.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INRG.L achieves a 39.09% return, which is significantly higher than XLES.L's 31.61% return. Over the past 10 years, INRG.L has outperformed XLES.L with an annualized return of 12.64%, while XLES.L has yielded a comparatively lower 10.15% annualized return.

INRG.L

• 1D: -2.01%
• 1M: 8.39%
• YTD: 39.09%
• 6M: 35.51%
• 1Y: 82.63%
• 3Y*: 5.64%
• 5Y*: 2.72%
• 10Y*: 12.64%

XLES.L

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: -0.26%
• YTD: 31.61%
• 6M: 28.16%
• 1Y: 47.25%
• 3Y*: 14.10%
• 5Y*: 21.30%
• 10Y*: 10.15%

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

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	39.09%	34.75%	-24.39%	-23.83%	5.52%	-23.71%	135.23%	39.22%	-2.66%	10.46%
XLES.L Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc	31.61%	1.00%	5.10%	-4.65%	81.11%	53.54%	-35.86%	7.12%	-13.56%	-9.61%

Correlation

The correlation between INRG.L and XLES.L is -0.10, 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	-0.10
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.12
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2010	0.31

The correlation between INRG.L and XLES.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.31 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	INRG.L	XLES.L
Utilities	33.7%	-
Industrials	28.3%	-
Energy	24.7%	100.0%
Technology	10.5%	-
Basic Materials	1.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

INRG.L vs. XLES.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

INRG.L

INRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 91
INRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
INRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
INRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 87
INRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
INRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 89

XLES.L

XLES.L Risk / Return Rank: 62
XLES.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
XLES.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
XLES.L Omega Ratio Rank: 59
XLES.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
XLES.L Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) and Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLES.L). 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.

	INRG.L	XLES.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.42	2.08	+1.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.38	2.58	+1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.35	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.64	2.99	+3.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.87	9.32	+10.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INRG.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.42, which is higher than the XLES.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INRG.L and XLES.L, 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

	INRG.L	XLES.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.42	2.08	+1.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11	0.80	-0.69
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	0.36	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.02	0.34	-0.32

Drawdowns

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INRG.L drawdown since its inception was -85.09%, which is greater than XLES.L's maximum drawdown of -63.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INRG.L and XLES.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	INRG.L	XLES.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.09%	-63.08%	-22.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.38%	-15.71%	+3.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.29%	-24.42%	-19.87%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.38%	-24.42%	-32.96%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-65.47%	-63.08%	-2.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.35%	-7.98%	-19.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-56.54%	-15.44%	-41.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.15%	5.06%	-0.91%

Volatility

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) has a higher volatility of 9.58% compared to Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLES.L) at 8.61%. This indicates that INRG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLES.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INRG.L	XLES.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.58%	8.61%	+0.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.61%	19.03%	-1.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.04%	22.75%	+1.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.80%	26.71%	-1.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.33%	28.56%	-3.23%

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

INRG.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XLES.L's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

INRG.L vs. XLES.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
INRG.L iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	1.09%	1.77%	1.58%	1.00%	0.62%	1.01%	0.61%	2.05%	3.68%	3.69%	3.65%	3.90%
XLES.L Invesco Energy S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INRG.L and XLES.L in my portfolio?

INRG.L and XLES.L have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, INRG.L or XLES.L?

On fees, XLES.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, INRG.L or XLES.L?

XLES.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INRG.L.

What is the main difference between INRG.L and XLES.L?

INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD, while XLES.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for INRG.L and 0.14% for XLES.L.