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

Performance

PBW vs. ISCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF (ISCG). 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 ISCG's 12.92% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with PBW having a 11.06% annualized return and ISCG not far ahead at 11.37%.


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%

ISCG

1D
-0.93%
1M
3.29%
YTD
12.92%
6M
12.57%
1Y
30.64%
3Y*
17.01%
5Y*
5.31%
10Y*
11.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBW vs. ISCG - 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%
ISCG
iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF
12.92%12.88%13.35%23.13%-26.75%-1.26%43.41%27.66%-6.91%24.68%

Correlation

The correlation between PBW and ISCG is 0.72, 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

0.72

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

0.75

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

0.80

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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2005

0.77

The correlation between PBW and ISCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

PBW vs. ISCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PBW
ISCG

Industrials

34.3%
24.6%

Basic Materials

16.4%
3.5%

Technology

14.3%
21.4%

Consumer Cyclical

13.9%
9.9%

Energy

12.3%
2.8%

Utilities

6.3%
1.0%

Financial Services

1.4%
10.6%

Consumer Defensive

1.1%
2.9%

Communication Services

-

2.8%

Healthcare

-

15.4%

Real Estate

-

5.2%

Industrials

PBW
34.3%
ISCG
24.6%

Basic Materials

PBW
16.4%
ISCG
3.5%

Technology

PBW
14.3%
ISCG
21.4%

Consumer Cyclical

PBW
13.9%
ISCG
9.9%

Energy

PBW
12.3%
ISCG
2.8%

Utilities

PBW
6.3%
ISCG
1.0%

Financial Services

PBW
1.4%
ISCG
10.6%

Consumer Defensive

PBW
1.1%
ISCG
2.9%

Communication Services

PBW

-

ISCG
2.8%

Healthcare

PBW

-

ISCG
15.4%

Real Estate

PBW

-

ISCG
5.2%

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. ISCG — 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

ISCG
ISCG Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
ISCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISCG Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
ISCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISCG Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
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. ISCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) and iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF (ISCG). 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.


PBWISCGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.29

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.16

2.69

+4.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.88

10.31

+9.57

PBW vs. ISCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBW Sharpe Ratio is 3.77, which is higher than the ISCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBW and ISCG, 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


PBWISCGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.77

1.70

+2.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.24

0.23

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.49

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.03

0.41

-0.44

Drawdowns

PBW vs. ISCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBW drawdown since its inception was -89.02%, which is greater than ISCG's maximum drawdown of -57.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBW and ISCG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBWISCGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.02%

-57.72%

-31.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.24%

-11.43%

-9.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-68.04%

-26.71%

-41.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-84.50%

-37.80%

-46.70%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-89.02%

-41.48%

-47.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-62.54%

-0.93%

-61.61%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-62.91%

-11.63%

-51.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.64%

2.98%

+4.66%

Volatility

PBW vs. ISCG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a higher volatility of 13.35% compared to iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF (ISCG) at 4.93%. This indicates that PBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ISCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBWISCGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

13.35%

4.93%

+8.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.20%

13.09%

+15.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

40.48%

18.13%

+22.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

42.91%

22.95%

+19.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

38.76%

23.16%

+15.60%

PBW vs. ISCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBW has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than ISCG's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

PBW vs. ISCG - Dividend Comparison

PBW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, more than ISCG's 0.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ISCG
iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF
0.56%0.61%0.84%0.77%0.92%0.62%0.10%0.27%0.40%0.52%1.19%0.64%
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 ISCG have a correlation of 0.72, 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 ISCG (4.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBW dropped -89.02% vs ISCG's -57.72%.

On 10-year performance, ISCG leads with 11.37% vs 11.06% for PBW. On fees, ISCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, ISCG has been the lower-risk option at 4.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ISCG has performed better with a 11.37% return vs 11.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ISCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.56% for ISCG.

PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX), while ISCG tracks Morningstar US Small Cap Broad Growth Extended Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PBW and 0.06% for ISCG.

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 vs 1.70), 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 ISCG

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