RNRG vs. ICLN

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RNRG (Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - RNRG tracks the Indxx Renewable Energy Producers Index while ICLN tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RNRG returned 2.46%/yr vs 8.55%/yr for ICLN. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RNRG charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ICLN.

Performance

RNRG vs. ICLN - 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 Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RNRG achieves a 4.23% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 7.10% return. Over the past 10 years, RNRG has underperformed ICLN with an annualized return of 2.46%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively higher 8.55% annualized return.

RNRG

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: -2.37%
• 6M: -3.29%
• YTD: 4.23%
• 1Y: 17.23%
• 3Y*: 0.26%
• 5Y*: -5.50%
• 10Y*: 2.46%
• ALL TIME*: 0.25%

ICLN

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -10.78%
• 6M: -3.05%
• YTD: 7.10%
• 1Y: 31.07%
• 3Y*: 0.63%
• 5Y*: -3.76%
• 10Y*: 8.55%
• ALL TIME*: -3.93%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	$109.16M	$91.32M	$121.79M
RNRG Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF	$473.71K	$298.66K	$326.77K

RNRG vs. ICLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RNRG Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF	4.23%	29.61%	-22.00%	-12.82%	-15.30%	-12.78%	26.67%	37.04%	-6.22%	21.16%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	7.10%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%

Correlation

The correlation between RNRG and ICLN is 0.69, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.76
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.78
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2015	0.68

The correlation between RNRG and ICLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (all time) to 0.78 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RNRG vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RNRG	ICLN
Utilities	92.8%	40.9%
Industrials	3.0%	22.6%
Technology	2.5%	25.0%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.7%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	8.3%
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

RNRG vs. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RNRG

RNRG Risk / Return Rank: 41
RNRG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
RNRG Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
RNRG Omega Ratio Rank: 41
RNRG Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
RNRG Martin Ratio Rank: 39

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 39
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 38

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RNRG vs. ICLN - 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 Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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.

	RNRG	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.10	1.06	+0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	1.55	+0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.19	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.20	1.13	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.10	3.93	+0.17

RNRG vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RNRG Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is comparable to the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RNRG and ICLN, 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

RNRG vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RNRG drawdown since its inception was -58.79%, smaller than the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNRG and ICLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	RNRG	ICLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.79%	-87.15%	+28.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.75%	-28.78%	+14.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.62%	-36.96%	+6.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.17%	-57.16%	+4.99%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.79%	-66.75%	+7.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.32%	-52.08%	+13.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-24.60%	-66.42%	+41.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.32%	8.23%	-3.91%

Volatility

RNRG vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF (RNRG) is 4.78%, while iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a volatility of 10.74%. This indicates that RNRG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RNRG	ICLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.78%	10.74%	-5.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.85%	25.25%	-12.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.09%	30.58%	-14.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.12%	28.04%	-7.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.56%	27.51%	-7.95%

RNRG vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RNRG has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than ICLN's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

RNRG vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

RNRG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, more than ICLN's 1.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.05%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
RNRG Global X Funds Global X Renewable Energy Producers ETF	1.71%	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 ICLN in my portfolio?

RNRG and ICLN have a correlation of 0.69, 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 ICLN?

ICLN has higher volatility (10.74%) compared to RNRG (4.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNRG dropped -58.79% vs ICLN's -87.15%.

Which ETF is better, RNRG or ICLN?

On 10-year performance, ICLN leads with 8.55% vs 2.46% for RNRG. On fees, ICLN is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RNRG has been the lower-risk option at 4.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RNRG or ICLN?

Over the 10-year period, ICLN has performed better with a 8.55% return vs 2.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RNRG or ICLN?

ICLN is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for RNRG.

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

RNRG has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 1.05% for ICLN.

What is the main difference between RNRG and ICLN?

RNRG tracks Indxx Renewable Energy Producers Index, while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for RNRG and 0.39% for ICLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RNRG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.10 vs 1.06), 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.