PBW vs. ICLN

Last updated Jun 19, 2026

PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBW is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PBW returned 10.13%/yr vs 11.22%/yr for ICLN. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PBW charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ICLN.

Performance

PBW vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBW achieves a 36.16% return, which is significantly higher than ICLN's 28.77% return. Over the past 10 years, PBW has underperformed ICLN with an annualized return of 10.13%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively higher 11.22% annualized return.

PBW

• 1D: 3.90%
• 1M: 9.37%
• YTD: 36.16%
• 6M: 34.96%
• 1Y: 114.88%
• 3Y*: 3.30%
• 5Y*: -11.89%
• 10Y*: 10.13%

ICLN

• 1D: 3.03%
• 1M: 0.79%
• YTD: 28.77%
• 6M: 30.76%
• 1Y: 67.89%
• 3Y*: 5.57%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: 11.22%

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

PBW vs. ICLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	36.16%	53.96%	-30.77%	-20.03%	-44.55%	-29.86%	204.82%	62.58%	-14.11%	39.92%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	28.77%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%

Correlation

The correlation between PBW and ICLN is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.78

The correlation between PBW and ICLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

PBW vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PBW	ICLN
Industrials	33.0%	26.2%
Basic Materials	16.0%	1.3%
Consumer Cyclical	14.8%	0.1%
Technology	14.3%	10.8%
Energy	11.9%	24.9%
Utilities	7.3%	35.4%
Financial Services	1.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

PBW vs. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBW

PBW Risk / Return Rank: 80
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 69
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 78

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 78
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 69
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	PBW	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	2.43	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	3.02	+0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.38	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.44	4.17	+1.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.13	14.77	-0.65

PBW vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBW and ICLN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PBW vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -89.02%, 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.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBW	ICLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.02%	-87.15%	-1.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.24%	-16.38%	-4.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-68.04%	-43.18%	-24.86%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-84.50%	-57.16%	-27.34%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.02%	-66.75%	-22.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-65.69%	-42.39%	-23.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-62.90%	-66.54%	+3.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.16%	4.61%	+3.55%

Volatility

PBW vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a higher volatility of 18.10% compared to iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) at 13.10%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	PBW	ICLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	18.10%	13.10%	+5.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.09%	22.64%	+8.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.15%	28.06%	+14.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.32%	27.59%	+15.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	38.99%	27.34%	+11.65%

PBW vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than ICLN's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBW vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than ICLN's 0.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	0.87%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
PBW Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF	0.65%	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

Can I hold both PBW and ICLN in my portfolio?

PBW and ICLN have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBW or ICLN?

PBW has higher volatility (18.10%) compared to ICLN (13.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBW dropped -89.02% vs ICLN's -87.15%.

Which ETF is better, PBW or ICLN?

On 10-year performance, ICLN leads with 11.22% vs 10.13% for PBW. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ICLN has been the lower-risk option at 13.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBW or ICLN?

Over the 10-year period, ICLN has performed better with a 11.22% return vs 10.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBW or ICLN?

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBW or ICLN?

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.65% for PBW.

What is the main difference between PBW and ICLN?

PBW is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while ICLN is Alternative Energy Equities. PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PBW and 0.39% for ICLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.43), 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.