NAEFX vs. GCEBX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

NAEFX (New Alternatives Fund Investor Class) and GCEBX (Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds. Over the past 5 years, NAEFX returned 1.54%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for GCEBX. Their correlation of 0.90 means they have usually moved in the same direction. NAEFX charges 1.28%/yr vs 1.26%/yr for GCEBX.

Performance

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in New Alternatives Fund Investor Class (NAEFX) and Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares (GCEBX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NAEFX achieves a 13.25% return, which is significantly higher than GCEBX's 12.26% return.

NAEFX

• 1D: 2.45%
• 1M: -2.72%
• 6M: 8.22%
• YTD: 13.25%
• 1Y: 21.08%
• 3Y*: 8.93%
• 5Y*: 1.54%
• 10Y*: 9.35%
• ALL TIME*: 10.41%

GCEBX

• 1D: 2.72%
• 1M: -5.81%
• 6M: 1.63%
• YTD: 12.26%
• 1Y: 29.01%
• 3Y*: 6.88%
• 5Y*: 0.63%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.26%

*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)
GCEBX Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
NAEFX New Alternatives Fund Investor Class	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
NAEFX New Alternatives Fund Investor Class	13.25%	27.81%	-6.26%	-2.74%	-16.08%	-5.02%	57.69%
GCEBX Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares	12.26%	39.79%	-14.20%	-14.97%	-11.37%	-2.89%	46.85%

Correlation

The correlation between NAEFX and GCEBX 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.	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2020	0.90

The correlation between NAEFX and GCEBX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NAEFX vs. GCEBX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NAEFX

NAEFX Risk / Return Rank: 48
NAEFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
NAEFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
NAEFX Omega Ratio Rank: 36
NAEFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
NAEFX Martin Ratio Rank: 51

GCEBX

GCEBX Risk / Return Rank: 60
GCEBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
GCEBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
GCEBX Omega Ratio Rank: 58
GCEBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
GCEBX Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for New Alternatives Fund Investor Class (NAEFX) and Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares (GCEBX). 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.

	NAEFX	GCEBX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	1.60	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.77	2.17	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.27	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.57	2.00	+0.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.34	7.54	-0.20

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NAEFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is comparable to the GCEBX Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NAEFX and GCEBX, 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

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NAEFX drawdown since its inception was -42.74%, smaller than the maximum GCEBX drawdown of -45.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NAEFX and GCEBX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NAEFX	GCEBX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.74%	-45.74%	+3.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.54%	-14.66%	+7.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.10%	-22.23%	+3.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.35%	-41.51%	+3.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.95%	-12.34%	+7.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.28%	-22.29%	+9.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.64%	3.87%	-1.23%

Volatility

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for New Alternatives Fund Investor Class (NAEFX) is 4.23%, while Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares (GCEBX) has a volatility of 5.87%. This indicates that NAEFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GCEBX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NAEFX	GCEBX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.23%	5.87%	-1.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.85%	14.96%	-2.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.49%	18.35%	-2.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.91%	19.52%	-1.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.00%	19.33%	-1.33%

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NAEFX has a 1.28% expense ratio, which is higher than GCEBX's 1.26% expense ratio.

Dividends

NAEFX vs. GCEBX - Dividend Comparison

NAEFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, less than GCEBX's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GCEBX Goldman Sachs Clean Energy Income Fund Class A Shares	1.17%	1.41%	2.61%	2.98%	0.56%	6.08%	0.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NAEFX New Alternatives Fund Investor Class	0.82%	0.93%	1.75%	4.14%	4.37%	4.90%	4.88%	5.35%	6.39%	3.98%	3.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NAEFX and GCEBX in my portfolio?

NAEFX and GCEBX 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, NAEFX or GCEBX?

GCEBX has higher volatility (5.87%) compared to NAEFX (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NAEFX dropped -42.74% vs GCEBX's -45.74%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GCEBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 1.25), 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.