PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RNRG vs. ERTH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RNRG vs. ERTH - 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 Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RNRG achieves a 17.66% return, which is significantly higher than ERTH's 8.02% return. Over the past 10 years, RNRG has underperformed ERTH with an annualized return of 4.47%, while ERTH has yielded a comparatively higher 7.44% annualized 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%

ERTH

1D
-1.09%
1M
3.19%
YTD
8.02%
6M
9.21%
1Y
22.54%
3Y*
3.35%
5Y*
-3.76%
10Y*
7.44%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RNRG vs. ERTH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%-6.22%21.16%
ERTH
Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF
8.02%18.47%-13.56%0.12%-27.59%2.64%51.02%36.78%-12.49%30.53%

Correlation

The correlation between RNRG and ERTH is 0.66, 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

0.66

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

0.68

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

0.73

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

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2015

0.62

The correlation between RNRG and ERTH shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (all time) to 0.73 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RNRG vs. ERTH - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RNRG
ERTH

Utilities

92.8%
6.5%

Industrials

3.0%
21.0%

Technology

2.2%
10.5%

Basic Materials

2.1%
2.3%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

14.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.1%

Energy

-

8.5%

Financial Services

-

0.3%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

26.7%

Utilities

RNRG
92.8%
ERTH
6.5%

Industrials

RNRG
3.0%
ERTH
21.0%

Technology

RNRG
2.2%
ERTH
10.5%

Basic Materials

RNRG
2.1%
ERTH
2.3%

Communication Services

RNRG

-

ERTH

-

Consumer Cyclical

RNRG

-

ERTH
14.3%

Consumer Defensive

RNRG

-

ERTH
2.1%

Energy

RNRG

-

ERTH
8.5%

Financial Services

RNRG

-

ERTH
0.3%

Healthcare

RNRG

-

ERTH

-

Real Estate

RNRG

-

ERTH
26.7%

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

RNRG vs. ERTH — Risk / Return Rank

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

RNRG
RNRG Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
RNRG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RNRG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
RNRG Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
RNRG Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
RNRG Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

ERTH
ERTH Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
ERTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ERTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
ERTH Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
ERTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
ERTH Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
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.

RNRG vs. ERTH - 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 Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH). 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.


RNRGERTHDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.72

1.36

+1.36

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.58

1.93

+1.65

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.24

+0.21

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

7.20

2.81

+4.40

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

19.98

7.79

+12.19

RNRG vs. ERTH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNRG Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is higher than the ERTH Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNRG and ERTH, 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


RNRGERTHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.72

1.36

+1.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.13

-0.17

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

0.33

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.07

0.21

-0.14

Drawdowns

RNRG vs. ERTH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNRG drawdown since its inception was -58.79%, smaller than the maximum ERTH drawdown of -64.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNRG and ERTH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RNRGERTHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.79%

-64.45%

+5.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.95%

-8.07%

+2.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.23%

-33.82%

-1.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-52.17%

-51.72%

-0.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-58.79%

-51.72%

-7.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-30.37%

-27.23%

-3.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-24.45%

-21.47%

-2.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.14%

2.90%

-0.76%

Volatility

RNRG vs. ERTH - Volatility Comparison

Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF (RNRG) has a higher volatility of 5.55% compared to Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF (ERTH) at 5.20%. This indicates that RNRG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ERTH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RNRGERTHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.55%

5.20%

+0.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.10%

11.80%

+0.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.77%

16.73%

-0.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.10%

22.85%

-2.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.67%

22.62%

-2.95%

RNRG vs. ERTH - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

RNRG vs. ERTH - Dividend Comparison

RNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than ERTH's 1.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ERTH
Invesco MSCI Sustainable Future ETF
1.38%1.46%1.00%1.28%1.22%15.33%0.21%0.71%0.61%0.87%1.06%0.79%
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


RNRG and ERTH have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RNRG has higher volatility (5.55%) compared to ERTH (5.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNRG dropped -58.79% vs ERTH's -64.45%.

On 10-year performance, ERTH leads with 7.44% vs 4.47% for RNRG. On fees, ERTH is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, ERTH has been the lower-risk option at 5.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ERTH has performed better with a 7.44% return vs 4.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

ERTH has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 1.28% for RNRG.

RNRG tracks Indxx Renewable Energy Producers Index, while ERTH tracks MSCI Global Environment Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for RNRG and 0.55% for ERTH.

RNRG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 1.36), 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 RNRG and ERTH

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