PBW vs. ICLN
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN).
PBW and ICLN are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PBW is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). It was launched on Mar 3, 2005. ICLN is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. It was launched on Jun 24, 2008. Both PBW and ICLN are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: PBW or ICLN.
Correlation
The correlation between PBW and ICLN is 0.79, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
PBW vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
PBW:
-0.90
ICLN:
-1.05
PBW:
-1.28
ICLN:
-1.43
PBW:
0.87
ICLN:
0.84
PBW:
-0.41
ICLN:
-0.36
PBW:
-1.17
ICLN:
-1.93
PBW:
29.66%
ICLN:
12.95%
PBW:
38.62%
ICLN:
23.85%
PBW:
-87.01%
ICLN:
-87.15%
PBW:
-84.46%
ICLN:
-69.65%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBW achieves a -34.30% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's -25.91% return. Over the past 10 years, PBW has underperformed ICLN with an annualized return of -1.16%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively higher 3.52% annualized return.
PBW
-34.30%
-1.79%
-5.77%
-31.80%
-8.56%
-1.16%
ICLN
-25.91%
-4.97%
-17.84%
-22.53%
0.66%
3.52%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PBW vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than ICLN's 0.46% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
PBW vs. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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.
Dividends
PBW vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison
PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.88%, more than ICLN's 1.85% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF | 1.88% | 3.68% | 4.21% | 1.71% | 0.44% | 1.45% | 2.89% | 1.27% | 2.69% | 1.54% | 2.96% | 2.18% |
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | 1.85% | 1.59% | 0.89% | 1.18% | 0.34% | 1.36% | 2.77% | 2.49% | 3.88% | 2.36% | 2.83% | 2.11% |
Drawdowns
PBW vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -87.01%, roughly equal to the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBW and ICLN. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
PBW vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a higher volatility of 10.08% compared to iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) at 5.49%. This indicates that PBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.