PBD vs. FRNW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PBD (Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF) and FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds. PBD is passively managed, while FRNW is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PBD returned 8.96%/yr vs 10.12%/yr for FRNW. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBD charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FRNW.

Performance

PBD vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD) 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, PBD achieves a 38.50% return, which is significantly higher than FRNW's 34.11% return.

PBD

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: 6.10%
• YTD: 38.50%
• 6M: 39.82%
• 1Y: 92.04%
• 3Y*: 8.96%
• 5Y*: -3.66%
• 10Y*: 9.45%

FRNW

• 1D: -1.91%
• 1M: 7.89%
• YTD: 34.11%
• 6M: 34.18%
• 1Y: 86.03%
• 3Y*: 10.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBD vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF	38.50%	43.65%	-26.39%	-10.69%	-29.70%	0.18%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	34.11%	53.20%	-21.11%	-19.64%	-11.46%	-2.85%

Correlation

The correlation between PBD and FRNW is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2021	0.90

The correlation between PBD and FRNW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

PBD vs. FRNW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PBD	FRNW
Industrials	48.1%	30.1%
Energy	12.4%	21.0%
Utilities	12.0%	43.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.4%	-
Technology	6.8%	5.5%
Basic Materials	3.4%	-
Financial Services	1.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.9%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PBD vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBD

PBD Risk / Return Rank: 94
PBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
PBD Omega Ratio Rank: 91
PBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
PBD Martin Ratio Rank: 94

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 90
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

PBD vs. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD) 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.

	PBD	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.96	3.39	+0.57
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.64	4.06	+0.58
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.51	+0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.65	7.47	+1.17
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	26.96	23.29	+3.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PBD vs. FRNW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBD Sharpe Ratio is 3.96, which is comparable to the FRNW Sharpe Ratio of 3.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBD 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PBD	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.96	3.39	+0.57
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.13	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.35	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.03	0.09	-0.06

Drawdowns

PBD vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBD drawdown since its inception was -78.60%, which is greater than FRNW's maximum drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBD and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBD	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.60%	-59.37%	-19.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.70%	-11.58%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-52.45%	-45.27%	-7.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.15%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-75.40%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.02%	-3.15%	-35.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-53.40%	-33.33%	-20.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.43%	3.71%	-0.28%

Volatility

PBD vs. FRNW - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD) has a higher volatility of 8.57% compared to Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) at 8.16%. This indicates that PBD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRNW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBD	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.57%	8.16%	+0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.00%	17.79%	-0.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.41%	25.61%	-2.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.37%	28.35%	+0.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.26%	28.35%	-1.09%

PBD vs. FRNW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBD has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than FRNW's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBD vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

PBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, more than FRNW's 0.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	0.94%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF	1.63%	2.71%	1.81%	2.85%	2.98%	0.67%	0.48%	1.83%	1.86%	1.76%	2.04%	1.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBD and FRNW in my portfolio?

PBD and FRNW have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBD or FRNW?

PBD has higher volatility (8.57%) compared to FRNW (8.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBD dropped -78.60% vs FRNW's -59.37%.

Which ETF is better, PBD or FRNW?

On 3-year performance, FRNW leads with 10.12% vs 8.96% for PBD. On fees, FRNW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FRNW has been the lower-risk option at 8.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBD or FRNW?

Over the 3-year period, FRNW has performed better with a 10.12% return vs 8.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBD or FRNW?

FRNW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PBD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBD or FRNW?

PBD has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.94% for FRNW.

What is the main difference between PBD and FRNW?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PBD and 0.39% for FRNW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.96 vs 3.39), 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.