RDIV vs. FRNW

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

RDIV (Invesco S&P Ultra Dividend Revenue ETF) and FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RDIV is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the S&P 900 Dividend Revenue-Weighted Index, while FRNW is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. RDIV is passively managed, while FRNW is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RDIV returned 18.46%/yr vs 6.49%/yr for FRNW. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.39% expense ratio.

Performance

RDIV vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P Ultra Dividend Revenue ETF (RDIV) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RDIV achieves a 14.73% return, which is significantly lower than FRNW's 23.62% return.

RDIV

• 1D: -1.73%
• 1M: 5.67%
• YTD: 14.73%
• 6M: 12.64%
• 1Y: 29.81%
• 3Y*: 18.46%
• 5Y*: 10.99%
• 10Y*: 11.04%

FRNW

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: -4.24%
• YTD: 23.62%
• 6M: 23.50%
• 1Y: 63.53%
• 3Y*: 6.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RDIV vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RDIV Invesco S&P Ultra Dividend Revenue ETF	14.73%	12.36%	15.17%	4.66%	7.16%	6.47%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	23.62%	53.20%	-21.11%	-19.64%	-11.46%	-2.52%

Correlation

The correlation between RDIV and FRNW is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2021	0.46

Over the past year, the correlation between RDIV and FRNW has dropped to 0.24 - well below their long-term average of 0.46, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RDIV vs. FRNW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RDIV	FRNW
Financial Services	17.8%	-
Energy	17.3%	22.5%
Consumer Cyclical	15.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	14.6%	-
Communication Services	8.8%	-
Real Estate	7.3%	-
Healthcare	6.8%	-
Technology	6.2%	6.0%
Utilities	6.2%	42.5%
Basic Materials	0.5%	-
Industrials	-	28.7%

Return for Risk

RDIV vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

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

RDIV

RDIV Risk / Return Rank: 84
RDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
RDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 74
RDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
RDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 89

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 79
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 69
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

RDIV vs. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Ultra Dividend Revenue ETF (RDIV) and Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW). 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.

	RDIV	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.26	2.37	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.33	2.98	+0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.37	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.18	4.50	+1.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.36	15.55	+2.81

RDIV vs. FRNW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RDIV Sharpe Ratio is 2.26, which is comparable to the FRNW Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RDIV and FRNW, 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

RDIV vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RDIV drawdown since its inception was -49.97%, smaller than the maximum FRNW drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RDIV and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	RDIV	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-49.97%	-59.37%	+9.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.84%	-14.20%	+9.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.91%	-45.14%	+27.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.89%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.97%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.73%	-10.73%	+9.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.85%	-33.15%	+27.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.63%	4.10%	-2.47%

Volatility

RDIV vs. FRNW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P Ultra Dividend Revenue ETF (RDIV) is 4.07%, while Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) has a volatility of 10.63%. This indicates that RDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRNW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RDIV	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.07%	10.63%	-6.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.83%	19.59%	-10.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.26%	26.98%	-13.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.56%	28.51%	-10.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.90%	28.51%	-6.61%

RDIV vs. FRNW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both RDIV and FRNW have an expense ratio of 0.39%.

Dividends

RDIV vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

RDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.57%, more than FRNW's 1.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	1.02%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RDIV Invesco S&P Ultra Dividend Revenue ETF	3.57%	3.94%	4.08%	3.93%	3.44%	3.31%	4.93%	3.84%	4.32%	4.26%	2.20%	4.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RDIV and FRNW in my portfolio?

RDIV and FRNW have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RDIV or FRNW?

FRNW has higher volatility (10.63%) compared to RDIV (4.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RDIV dropped -49.97% vs FRNW's -59.37%.

Which ETF is better, RDIV or FRNW?

On 3-year performance, RDIV leads with 18.46% vs 6.49% for FRNW. Both ETFs have the same 0.39% expense ratio. On volatility, RDIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RDIV or FRNW?

Over the 3-year period, RDIV has performed better with a 18.46% return vs 6.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RDIV or FRNW?

RDIV and FRNW have the same expense ratio: 0.39% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RDIV or FRNW?

RDIV has the higher dividend yield at 3.57%, compared with 1.02% for FRNW.

What is the main difference between RDIV and FRNW?

RDIV is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while FRNW is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FRNW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 2.26), 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.