OIH vs. RNWZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OIH (VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF) and RNWZ (TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. OIH is passively managed, while RNWZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, OIH returned 18.56%/yr vs 12.63%/yr for RNWZ. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. OIH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RNWZ.

Performance

OIH vs. RNWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF (OIH) and TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OIH achieves a 51.43% return, which is significantly higher than RNWZ's 16.28% return.

OIH

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -2.77%
• YTD: 51.43%
• 6M: 43.87%
• 1Y: 92.96%
• 3Y*: 18.56%
• 5Y*: 13.62%
• 10Y*: -0.90%

RNWZ

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -2.61%
• YTD: 16.28%
• 6M: 16.86%
• 1Y: 38.19%
• 3Y*: 12.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OIH vs. RNWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
OIH VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF	51.43%	6.81%	-10.53%	3.20%	13.39%
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF	16.28%	36.33%	-7.36%	-3.89%	-0.19%

Correlation

The correlation between OIH and RNWZ is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2022	0.27

OIH vs. RNWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OIH	RNWZ
Energy	98.0%	3.8%
Utilities	1.8%	41.0%
Basic Materials	-	4.5%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	6.9%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	5.3%
Real Estate	-	3.2%
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

OIH vs. RNWZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

OIH

OIH Risk / Return Rank: 89
OIH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
OIH Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
OIH Omega Ratio Rank: 79
OIH Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
OIH Martin Ratio Rank: 93

RNWZ

RNWZ Risk / Return Rank: 80
RNWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RNWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
RNWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 76
RNWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
RNWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

OIH vs. RNWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF (OIH) and TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ). 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.

	OIH	RNWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	2.55	+0.64
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.87	3.40	+0.47
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.45	+0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.80	6.33	+3.47
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	24.42	15.60	+8.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OIH vs. RNWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OIH Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is comparable to the RNWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OIH and RNWZ, 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

	OIH	RNWZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.19	2.55	+0.64
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.02	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.01	0.61	-0.61

Drawdowns

OIH vs. RNWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OIH drawdown since its inception was -94.45%, which is greater than RNWZ's maximum drawdown of -24.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OIH and RNWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	OIH	RNWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.45%	-24.90%	-69.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	-6.06%	-3.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.80%	-24.74%	-19.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.80%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-61.60%	-4.46%	-57.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.84%	-7.19%	-41.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.82%	2.45%	+1.37%

Volatility

OIH vs. RNWZ - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF (OIH) has a higher volatility of 7.95% compared to TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) at 5.06%. This indicates that OIH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RNWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OIH	RNWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.95%	5.06%	+2.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.36%	11.86%	+8.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.49%	15.06%	+14.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.79%	16.99%	+19.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.41%	16.99%	+25.42%

OIH vs. RNWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

OIH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than RNWZ's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

OIH vs. RNWZ - Dividend Comparison

OIH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, less than RNWZ's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
OIH VanEck Vectors Oil Services ETF	1.13%	1.71%	2.01%	1.36%	0.95%	0.98%	1.23%	2.10%	2.13%	2.60%	1.40%	2.39%
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF	1.93%	2.12%	2.36%	3.87%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OIH and RNWZ in my portfolio?

OIH and RNWZ have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OIH or RNWZ?

OIH has higher volatility (7.95%) compared to RNWZ (5.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OIH dropped -94.45% vs RNWZ's -24.90%.

Which ETF is better, OIH or RNWZ?

On 3-year performance, OIH leads with 18.56% vs 12.63% for RNWZ. On fees, OIH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RNWZ has been the lower-risk option at 5.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OIH or RNWZ?

Over the 3-year period, OIH has performed better with a 18.56% return vs 12.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OIH or RNWZ?

OIH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for RNWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OIH or RNWZ?

RNWZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.13% for OIH.

What is the main difference between OIH and RNWZ?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for OIH and 0.75% for RNWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OIH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.55), 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.