PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PBW vs. FYC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PBW vs. FYC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FYC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBW achieves a 48.64% return, which is significantly higher than FYC's 20.01% return. Over the past 10 years, PBW has underperformed FYC with an annualized return of 11.06%, while FYC has yielded a comparatively higher 14.30% annualized return.


PBW

1D
-3.49%
1M
18.16%
YTD
48.64%
6M
46.91%
1Y
151.19%
3Y*
8.19%
5Y*
-10.05%
10Y*
11.06%

FYC

1D
-0.91%
1M
3.23%
YTD
20.01%
6M
20.96%
1Y
53.40%
3Y*
26.12%
5Y*
10.47%
10Y*
14.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBW vs. FYC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PBW
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
48.64%53.96%-30.77%-20.03%-44.55%-29.86%204.82%62.58%-14.11%39.92%
FYC
First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
20.01%24.24%23.99%14.52%-25.86%21.64%32.34%16.79%-5.54%22.97%

Correlation

The correlation between PBW and FYC is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.73

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.75

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2011

0.73

The correlation between PBW and FYC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

PBW vs. FYC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PBW
FYC

Industrials

34.3%
13.4%

Basic Materials

16.4%
3.4%

Technology

14.3%
13.7%

Consumer Cyclical

13.9%
9.9%

Energy

12.3%
3.4%

Utilities

6.3%
1.5%

Financial Services

1.4%
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.1%
3.8%

Communication Services

-

3.4%

Healthcare

-

27.9%

Real Estate

-

8.4%

Industrials

PBW
34.3%
FYC
13.4%

Basic Materials

PBW
16.4%
FYC
3.4%

Technology

PBW
14.3%
FYC
13.7%

Consumer Cyclical

PBW
13.9%
FYC
9.9%

Energy

PBW
12.3%
FYC
3.4%

Utilities

PBW
6.3%
FYC
1.5%

Financial Services

PBW
1.4%
FYC
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

PBW
1.1%
FYC
3.8%

Communication Services

PBW

-

FYC
3.4%

Healthcare

PBW

-

FYC
27.9%

Real Estate

PBW

-

FYC
8.4%

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

PBW vs. FYC — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBW
PBW Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

FYC
FYC Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FYC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FYC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
FYC Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
FYC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
FYC Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PBW vs. FYC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FYC). 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.


PBWFYCDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.77

2.55

+1.22

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.92

3.45

+0.47

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.41

+0.06

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

7.16

5.12

+2.04

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

19.88

18.64

+1.24

PBW vs. FYC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBW Sharpe Ratio is 3.77, which is higher than the FYC Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBW and FYC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PBWFYCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.77

2.55

+1.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.24

0.45

-0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.58

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.03

0.54

-0.57

Drawdowns

PBW vs. FYC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -89.02%, which is greater than FYC's maximum drawdown of -47.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBW and FYC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBWFYCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.02%

-47.85%

-41.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.24%

-10.48%

-10.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-68.04%

-27.79%

-40.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-84.50%

-35.37%

-49.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.02%

-47.85%

-41.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.54%

-1.83%

-60.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-62.91%

-9.66%

-53.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.64%

2.87%

+4.77%

Volatility

PBW vs. FYC - Volatility Comparison

Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a higher volatility of 13.35% compared to First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FYC) at 5.53%. This indicates that PBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FYC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBWFYCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.35%

5.53%

+7.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.20%

14.99%

+13.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.48%

21.03%

+19.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

42.91%

23.62%

+19.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

38.76%

24.57%

+14.19%

PBW vs. FYC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than FYC's 0.71% expense ratio.


Dividends

PBW vs. FYC - Dividend Comparison

PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, more than FYC's 0.07% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FYC
First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
0.07%0.08%0.72%0.58%0.00%0.63%0.12%0.39%0.09%0.10%0.31%0.21%
PBW
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
0.60%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


PBW and FYC have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBW has higher volatility (13.35%) compared to FYC (5.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBW dropped -89.02% vs FYC's -47.85%.

On 10-year performance, FYC leads with 14.30% vs 11.06% for PBW. On fees, PBW is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, FYC has been the lower-risk option at 5.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FYC has performed better with a 14.30% return vs 11.06%. 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 0.71% for FYC.

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.07% for FYC.

PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while FYC tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Small Cap Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PBW and 0.71% for FYC.

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PBW and FYC

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