RNRG vs. ACES

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RNRG (Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - RNRG tracks the Indxx Renewable Energy Producers Index while ACES tracks the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RNRG returned -2.70%/yr vs -8.73%/yr for ACES. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RNRG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ACES.

Performance

RNRG vs. ACES - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF (RNRG) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RNRG achieves a 17.66% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 28.72% return.

RNRG

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: 0.86%
• YTD: 17.66%
• 6M: 17.51%
• 1Y: 42.65%
• 3Y*: 4.44%
• 5Y*: -2.70%
• 10Y*: 4.47%

ACES

• 1D: -2.84%
• 1M: 17.92%
• YTD: 28.72%
• 6M: 27.36%
• 1Y: 69.96%
• 3Y*: -1.21%
• 5Y*: -8.73%
• 10Y*: —

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

RNRG vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
RNRG Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF	17.66%	29.61%	-22.00%	-12.82%	-15.30%	-12.78%	26.67%	37.04%	-1.16%
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	28.72%	25.44%	-26.71%	-20.04%	-28.44%	-19.44%	140.33%	51.70%	-9.63%

Correlation

The correlation between RNRG and ACES is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018	0.66

The correlation between RNRG and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

RNRG vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RNRG	ACES
Utilities	92.8%	25.5%
Industrials	3.0%	20.3%
Technology	2.2%	24.8%
Basic Materials	2.1%	9.3%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.2%
Energy	-	0.5%
Financial Services	-	5.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

RNRG vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank

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

RNRG

RNRG Risk / Return Rank: 84
RNRG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
RNRG Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
RNRG Omega Ratio Rank: 75
RNRG Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
RNRG Martin Ratio Rank: 89

ACES

ACES Risk / Return Rank: 62
ACES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
ACES Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
ACES Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ACES Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
ACES Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

RNRG vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF (RNRG) and ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES). 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.

	RNRG	ACES	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	2.18	+0.54
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	2.77	+0.81
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.33	+0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.20	4.03	+3.17
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.98	10.16	+9.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RNRG vs. ACES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNRG Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is comparable to the ACES Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNRG and ACES, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RNRG	ACES	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.72	2.18	+0.54
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.13	-0.24	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.23	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.07	0.22	-0.15

Drawdowns

RNRG vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNRG drawdown since its inception was -58.79%, smaller than the maximum ACES drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNRG and ACES.

Drawdown Indicators

	RNRG	ACES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.79%	-79.05%	+20.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.95%	-17.44%	+11.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.23%	-58.68%	+23.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.17%	-74.44%	+22.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-30.37%	-56.41%	+26.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.45%	-38.87%	+14.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	6.91%	-4.77%

Volatility

RNRG vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF (RNRG) is 5.55%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 9.99%. This indicates that RNRG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RNRG	ACES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.55%	9.99%	-4.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.10%	22.55%	-10.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.77%	32.42%	-16.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.10%	36.17%	-16.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.67%	35.59%	-15.92%

RNRG vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison

RNRG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than ACES's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

RNRG vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison

RNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, more than ACES's 0.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACES ALPS Clean Energy ETF	0.54%	0.70%	1.10%	1.44%	1.08%	0.71%	0.56%	1.79%	0.34%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RNRG Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF	1.28%	1.50%	1.48%	1.44%	1.15%	1.10%	3.16%	2.97%	5.22%	4.14%	5.02%	3.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RNRG and ACES in my portfolio?

RNRG and ACES have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RNRG or ACES?

ACES has higher volatility (9.99%) compared to RNRG (5.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNRG dropped -58.79% vs ACES's -79.05%.

Which ETF is better, RNRG or ACES?

On 5-year performance, RNRG leads with -2.70% vs -8.73% for ACES. On fees, ACES is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, RNRG has been the lower-risk option at 5.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RNRG or ACES?

Over the 5-year period, RNRG has performed better with a -2.70% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RNRG or ACES?

ACES is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RNRG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RNRG or ACES?

RNRG has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.54% for ACES.

What is the main difference between RNRG and ACES?

RNRG tracks Indxx Renewable Energy Producers Index, while ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for RNRG and 0.55% for ACES.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RNRG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.18), 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.