PBD vs. PBW
PBD (Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBD is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation index, while PBW is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PBD returned 9.55%/yr vs 11.45%/yr for PBW. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBD charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for PBW.
Performance
PBD vs. PBW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBD achieves a 39.81% return, which is significantly lower than PBW's 54.02% return. Over the past 10 years, PBD has underperformed PBW with an annualized return of 9.55%, while PBW has yielded a comparatively higher 11.45% annualized return.
PBD
- 1D
- 0.45%
- 1M
- 6.95%
- YTD
- 39.81%
- 6M
- 41.76%
- 1Y
- 96.83%
- 3Y*
- 9.30%
- 5Y*
- -3.25%
- 10Y*
- 9.55%
PBW
- 1D
- 3.64%
- 1M
- 21.42%
- YTD
- 54.02%
- 6M
- 52.03%
- 1Y
- 170.82%
- 3Y*
- 9.47%
- 5Y*
- -9.19%
- 10Y*
- 11.45%
PBD vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF | 39.81% | 43.65% | -26.39% | -10.69% | -29.70% | -22.30% | 145.46% | 40.00% | -19.32% | 28.72% |
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF | 54.02% | 53.96% | -30.77% | -20.03% | -44.55% | -29.86% | 204.82% | 62.58% | -14.11% | 39.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBD and PBW 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2007 | 0.84 |
The correlation between PBD and PBW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
PBD vs. PBW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PBD
PBW
Industrials
Energy
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Basic Materials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
PBD
PBW
Energy
PBD
PBW
Utilities
PBD
PBW
Consumer Cyclical
PBD
PBW
Technology
PBD
PBW
Basic Materials
PBD
PBW
Financial Services
PBD
PBW
Consumer Defensive
PBD
PBW
Communication Services
PBD
-
PBW
-
Healthcare
PBD
-
PBW
-
Real Estate
PBD
-
PBW
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PBD vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank
PBD
PBW
PBD vs. PBW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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 | PBW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 4.17 | 4.27 | -0.10 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.82 | 4.26 | +0.56 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.63 | 1.52 | +0.11 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.03 | 7.81 | +1.22 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 28.22 | 21.72 | +6.50 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PBD | PBW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.17 | 4.27 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.12 | -0.22 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.35 | 0.30 | +0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.03 | -0.02 | +0.05 |
Drawdowns
PBD vs. PBW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBD drawdown since its inception was -78.60%, smaller than the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBD and PBW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBD | PBW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -78.60% | -89.02% | +10.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.70% | -21.24% | +10.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -52.45% | -68.04% | +15.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -69.15% | -84.50% | +15.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -75.40% | -89.02% | +13.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -38.44% | -61.19% | +22.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -53.40% | -62.91% | +9.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.43% | 7.63% | -4.20% |
Volatility
PBD vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF (PBD) is 8.49%, while Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a volatility of 12.68%. This indicates that PBD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBD | PBW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.49% | 12.68% | -4.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.06% | 28.06% | -11.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.38% | 40.36% | -16.98% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.37% | 42.89% | -14.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.26% | 38.75% | -11.49% |
PBD vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBD has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.
Dividends
PBD vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison
PBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, more than PBW's 0.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PBD Invesco Global Clean Energy ETF | 1.61% | 2.71% | 1.81% | 2.85% | 2.98% | 0.67% | 0.48% | 1.83% | 1.86% | 1.76% | 2.04% | 1.24% |
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF | 0.58% | 0.79% | 2.84% | 3.68% | 4.21% | 1.71% | 0.44% | 1.45% | 2.04% | 1.28% | 2.68% | 1.53% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PBD and PBW 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.
PBW has higher volatility (12.68%) compared to PBD (8.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBD dropped -78.60% vs PBW's -89.02%.
On 10-year performance, PBW leads with 11.45% vs 9.55% for PBD. On fees, PBW is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, PBD has been the lower-risk option at 8.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, PBW has performed better with a 11.45% return vs 9.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBW is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PBD.
PBD has the higher dividend yield at 1.61%, compared with 0.58% for PBW.
PBD is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while PBW is Small Cap Growth Equities. PBD tracks WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation index, while PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PBD and 0.61% for PBW.
PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.27 vs 4.17), 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.
Find the right allocation for PBD and PBW
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer