PWER vs. DABS
PWER (Macquarie Energy Transition ETF) and DABS (DoubleLine Asset-Backed Securities ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PWER is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Macquarie, while DABS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by DoubleLine. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PWER returned 70.78% vs 5.66% for DABS. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. PWER charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for DABS.
Performance
PWER vs. DABS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWER achieves a 31.35% return, which is significantly higher than DABS's 0.88% return.
PWER
- 1D
- -1.00%
- 1M
- 7.47%
- YTD
- 31.35%
- 6M
- 32.81%
- 1Y
- 70.78%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DABS
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 0.88%
- 6M
- 1.22%
- 1Y
- 5.66%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PWER vs. DABS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PWER Macquarie Energy Transition ETF | 31.35% | 44.00% |
DABS DoubleLine Asset-Backed Securities ETF | 0.88% | 5.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWER and DABS is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2025 | -0.08 |
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
PWER vs. DABS — Risk / Return Rank
PWER
DABS
PWER vs. DABS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER) and DoubleLine Asset-Backed Securities ETF (DABS). 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.
| PWER | DABS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.92 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.59 | 1.47 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.85 | 4.40 | +3.44 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 32.42 | 15.21 | +17.22 |
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
| PWER | DABS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.61 | 2.28 | +1.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.24 | 2.05 | -0.81 |
Drawdowns
PWER vs. DABS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PWER drawdown since its inception was -29.68%, which is greater than DABS's maximum drawdown of -1.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWER and DABS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWER | DABS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.68% | -1.47% | -28.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.07% | -1.29% | -7.78% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.00% | -0.49% | -0.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.22% | -0.31% | -5.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | 0.37% | +1.82% |
Volatility
PWER vs. DABS - Volatility Comparison
Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER) has a higher volatility of 6.20% compared to DoubleLine Asset-Backed Securities ETF (DABS) at 0.71%. This indicates that PWER's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DABS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWER | DABS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.20% | 0.71% | +5.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.55% | 1.60% | +13.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.74% | 2.49% | +17.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.37% | 2.56% | +20.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.37% | 2.56% | +20.81% |
PWER vs. DABS - Expense Ratio Comparison
PWER has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than DABS's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
PWER vs. DABS - Dividend Comparison
PWER's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than DABS's 4.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DABS DoubleLine Asset-Backed Securities ETF | 4.89% | 3.81% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PWER Macquarie Energy Transition ETF | 1.05% | 1.37% | 1.05% | 0.06% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PWER and DABS have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PWER has higher volatility (6.20%) compared to DABS (0.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWER dropped -29.68% vs DABS's -1.47%.
On 1-year performance, PWER leads with 70.78% vs 5.66% for DABS. On fees, DABS is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, DABS has been the lower-risk option at 0.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PWER has performed better with a 70.78% return vs 5.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DABS is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for PWER.
DABS has the higher dividend yield at 4.89%, compared with 1.05% for PWER.
PWER is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while DABS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Macquarie and DoubleLine. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for PWER and 0.40% for DABS.
PWER currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.61 vs 2.28), 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 PWER and DABS
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