ROKT vs. FRNW

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

ROKT (SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF) and FRNW (Fidelity Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ROKT is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Kensho Final Frontiers Index, while FRNW is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. ROKT is passively managed, while FRNW is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ROKT returned 41.87%/yr vs 6.70%/yr for FRNW. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ROKT charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for FRNW.

Performance

ROKT vs. FRNW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF (ROKT) 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, ROKT achieves a 41.13% return, which is significantly higher than FRNW's 23.12% return.

ROKT

• 1D: -3.50%
• 1M: 2.08%
• YTD: 41.13%
• 6M: 44.16%
• 1Y: 96.95%
• 3Y*: 41.87%
• 5Y*: 23.65%
• 10Y*: —

FRNW

• 1D: 1.22%
• 1M: -4.62%
• YTD: 23.12%
• 6M: 22.47%
• 1Y: 62.88%
• 3Y*: 6.70%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ROKT vs. FRNW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ROKT SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF	41.13%	50.56%	27.89%	14.41%	-0.81%	-0.24%
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	23.12%	53.20%	-21.11%	-19.64%	-11.46%	-2.52%

Correlation

The correlation between ROKT and FRNW is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2021	0.59

The correlation between ROKT and FRNW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

ROKT vs. FRNW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ROKT	FRNW
Industrials	68.4%	28.7%
Technology	20.1%	6.0%
Communication Services	5.8%	-
Energy	5.7%	22.5%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	42.5%

Return for Risk

ROKT vs. FRNW — Risk / Return Rank

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

ROKT

ROKT Risk / Return Rank: 92
ROKT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
ROKT Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
ROKT Omega Ratio Rank: 88
ROKT Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
ROKT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

FRNW

FRNW Risk / Return Rank: 82
FRNW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
FRNW Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
FRNW Omega Ratio Rank: 73
FRNW Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FRNW Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

ROKT vs. FRNW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF (ROKT) 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.

	ROKT	FRNW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.15	2.36	+0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.74	2.97	+0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.37	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.38	4.48	+1.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	26.23	15.67	+10.57

ROKT vs. FRNW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROKT Sharpe Ratio is 3.15, which is higher than the FRNW Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROKT 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

ROKT vs. FRNW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROKT drawdown since its inception was -43.16%, smaller than the maximum FRNW drawdown of -59.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROKT and FRNW.

Drawdown Indicators

	ROKT	FRNW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.16%	-59.37%	+16.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.27%	-14.20%	-1.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.46%	-45.14%	+21.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.46%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.20%	-11.09%	-1.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.77%	-33.17%	+26.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.71%	4.05%	-0.34%

Volatility

ROKT vs. FRNW - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF (ROKT) has a higher volatility of 16.11% compared to Fidelity Clean Energy ETF (FRNW) at 10.63%. This indicates that ROKT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRNW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ROKT	FRNW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.11%	10.63%	+5.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.24%	19.61%	+7.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.97%	26.92%	+4.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.32%	28.52%	-5.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.42%	28.52%	-3.10%

ROKT vs. FRNW - Expense Ratio Comparison

ROKT has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than FRNW's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

ROKT vs. FRNW - Dividend Comparison

ROKT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%, less than FRNW's 1.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FRNW Fidelity Clean Energy ETF	1.02%	1.25%	1.43%	1.30%	0.69%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ROKT SPDR S&P Kensho Final Frontiers ETF	0.28%	0.41%	0.57%	0.62%	0.54%	1.79%	0.48%	0.74%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ROKT and FRNW in my portfolio?

ROKT and FRNW have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ROKT or FRNW?

ROKT has higher volatility (16.11%) compared to FRNW (10.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ROKT dropped -43.16% vs FRNW's -59.37%.

Which ETF is better, ROKT or FRNW?

On 3-year performance, ROKT leads with 41.87% vs 6.70% for FRNW. On fees, FRNW is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FRNW has been the lower-risk option at 10.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ROKT or FRNW?

Over the 3-year period, ROKT has performed better with a 41.87% return vs 6.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ROKT or FRNW?

FRNW is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for ROKT.

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

FRNW has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.28% for ROKT.

What is the main difference between ROKT and FRNW?

ROKT is categorized as Industrials Equities, while FRNW is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for ROKT and 0.39% for FRNW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ROKT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.15 vs 2.36), 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.