KMB vs. FRNW

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

KMB (Kimberly-Clark Corporation) is a stock, while FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) is Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. Over the past 3 years, KMB returned -2.94%/yr vs 3.53%/yr for FRNW. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

KMB vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KMB achieves a 10.87% return, which is significantly lower than FRNW's 13.37% return.

KMB

• 1D: 2.31%
• 1M: 4.52%
• 6M: 11.39%
• YTD: 10.87%
• 1Y: -10.42%
• 3Y*: -2.94%
• 5Y*: -0.96%
• 10Y*: 1.38%

FRNW

• 1D: -2.22%
• 1M: -7.03%
• 6M: 6.55%
• YTD: 13.37%
• 1Y: 40.18%
• 3Y*: 3.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KMB vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
KMB Kimberly-Clark Corporation	10.87%	-19.86%	11.79%	-7.08%	-1.58%	8.32%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	13.37%	53.20%	-21.11%	-19.64%	-11.46%	-2.52%

Correlation

The correlation between KMB and FRNW is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.11
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2021	0.07

The correlation between KMB and FRNW shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

KMB vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

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

KMB

KMB Risk / Return Rank: 29
KMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
KMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
KMB Omega Ratio Rank: 24
KMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
KMB Martin Ratio Rank: 34

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 52
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 46
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

KMB vs. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). 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.

	KMB	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.39	1.48	-1.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.34	2.04	-2.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.24	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.35	2.30	-2.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.52	7.09	-7.61

KMB vs. FRNW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KMB Sharpe Ratio is -0.39, which is lower than the FRNW Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KMB and FRNW, 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

KMB vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KMB drawdown since its inception was -36.97%, smaller than the maximum FRNW drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KMB and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	KMB	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.97%	-59.37%	+22.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.60%	-17.58%	-12.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.06%	-45.14%	+11.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.71%	-18.13%	-3.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.88%	-32.83%	+23.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.04%	5.68%	+14.36%

Volatility

KMB vs. FRNW - Volatility Comparison

Kimberly-Clark Corporation (KMB) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) have volatilities of 9.46% and 9.10%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KMB	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.46%	9.10%	+0.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.55%	20.51%	-1.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.96%	27.37%	-0.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.57%	28.56%	-7.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.22%	28.56%	-7.34%

Dividends

KMB vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

KMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.66%, more than FRNW's 1.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	1.21%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
KMB Kimberly-Clark Corporation	4.66%	5.00%	3.72%	3.88%	3.42%	3.19%	3.17%	3.00%	3.51%	3.22%	3.22%	2.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KMB and FRNW in my portfolio?

KMB and FRNW have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KMB or FRNW?

KMB has higher volatility (9.46%) compared to FRNW (9.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KMB dropped -36.97% vs FRNW's -59.37%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FRNW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs -0.39), 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.