RNRG vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RNRG (Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RNRG is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the Indxx Renewable Energy Producers Index, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. RNRG is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, RNRG returned 42.65% vs 3.96% for CSHP. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. RNRG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

RNRG vs. CSHP - 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 iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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 higher than CSHP's 1.63% 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%

CSHP

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.63%
• 6M: 1.93%
• 1Y: 3.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RNRG vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RNRG Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF	17.66%	29.61%	-15.13%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.63%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between RNRG and CSHP is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2024	-0.03

The correlation between RNRG and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to -0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RNRG vs. CSHP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RNRG	CSHP
Utilities	92.8%	-
Industrials	3.0%	-
Technology	2.2%	-
Basic Materials	2.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

RNRG vs. CSHP — 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

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 100
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. CSHP - 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 iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	11.91	-9.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	31.26	-27.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	7.44	-5.99
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.20	65.71	-58.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.98	432.16	-412.18
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. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNRG Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNRG and CSHP, 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	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.72	11.91	-9.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.13	—	—
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	10.75	-10.69

Drawdowns

RNRG vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNRG drawdown since its inception was -58.79%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNRG and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	RNRG	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.79%	-0.08%	-58.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.95%	-0.06%	-5.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.23%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-30.37%	0.00%	-30.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.45%	-0.00%	-24.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	0.01%	+2.13%

Volatility

RNRG vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF (RNRG) has a higher volatility of 5.55% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.07%. This indicates that RNRG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RNRG	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.55%	0.07%	+5.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.10%	0.24%	+11.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.77%	0.33%	+15.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.10%	0.40%	+19.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.67%	0.40%	+19.27%

RNRG vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

RNRG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

RNRG vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

RNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than CSHP's 3.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.92%	5.39%	1.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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 CSHP in my portfolio?

RNRG and CSHP have a correlation of -0.15, 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 CSHP?

RNRG has higher volatility (5.55%) compared to CSHP (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNRG dropped -58.79% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, RNRG or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, RNRG leads with 42.65% vs 3.96% for CSHP. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RNRG or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, RNRG has performed better with a 42.65% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RNRG or CSHP?

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RNRG.

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

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.92%, compared with 1.28% for RNRG.

What is the main difference between RNRG and CSHP?

RNRG is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for RNRG and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.91 vs 2.72), 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.