SMOG vs. ACES
SMOG (VanEck Low Carbon Energy ETF) and ACES (ALPS Clean Energy ETF) are both Alternative Energy Equities funds - SMOG tracks the MVIS Global Low Carbon Energy Index while ACES tracks the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SMOG returned 1.76%/yr vs -8.73%/yr for ACES. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SMOG charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for ACES.
Performance
SMOG vs. ACES - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMOG achieves a 18.16% return, which is significantly lower than ACES's 28.72% return.
SMOG
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- 0.08%
- YTD
- 18.16%
- 6M
- 17.43%
- 1Y
- 42.14%
- 3Y*
- 10.86%
- 5Y*
- 1.76%
- 10Y*
- 12.70%
ACES
- 1D
- -2.84%
- 1M
- 17.92%
- YTD
- 28.72%
- 6M
- 27.36%
- 1Y
- 69.96%
- 3Y*
- -1.21%
- 5Y*
- -8.73%
- 10Y*
- —
SMOG vs. ACES - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMOG VanEck Low Carbon Energy ETF | 18.16% | 33.36% | -9.33% | 1.42% | -29.92% | -2.75% | 118.38% | 38.86% | -6.03% |
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 SMOG and ACES is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2018 | 0.84 |
The correlation between SMOG and ACES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
SMOG vs. ACES - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SMOG
ACES
Utilities
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Energy
Basic Materials
Financial Services
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
SMOG
ACES
Industrials
SMOG
ACES
Consumer Cyclical
SMOG
ACES
Technology
SMOG
ACES
Energy
SMOG
ACES
Basic Materials
SMOG
ACES
Financial Services
SMOG
ACES
Communication Services
SMOG
-
ACES
-
Consumer Defensive
SMOG
-
ACES
Healthcare
SMOG
-
ACES
-
Real Estate
SMOG
-
ACES
-
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
SMOG vs. ACES — Risk / Return Rank
SMOG
ACES
SMOG vs. ACES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Low Carbon Energy ETF (SMOG) 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.
| SMOG | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.33 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.80 | 4.03 | +0.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.62 | 10.16 | +3.46 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SMOG | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.07 | 2.18 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.07 | -0.24 | +0.31 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.50 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.07 | 0.22 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
SMOG vs. ACES - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMOG drawdown since its inception was -84.39%, which is greater than ACES's maximum drawdown of -79.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMOG and ACES.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMOG | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.39% | -79.05% | -5.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.82% | -17.44% | +8.62% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.72% | -58.68% | +29.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.86% | -74.44% | +26.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.10% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.61% | -56.41% | +41.80% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -52.47% | -38.87% | -13.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.10% | 6.91% | -3.81% |
Volatility
SMOG vs. ACES - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck Low Carbon Energy ETF (SMOG) is 7.43%, while ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) has a volatility of 9.99%. This indicates that SMOG 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMOG | ACES | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.43% | 9.99% | -2.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.46% | 22.55% | -7.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.49% | 32.42% | -11.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.12% | 36.17% | -11.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.73% | 35.59% | -9.86% |
SMOG vs. ACES - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMOG has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than ACES's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMOG vs. ACES - Dividend Comparison
SMOG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, 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% |
SMOG VanEck Low Carbon Energy ETF | 1.33% | 1.57% | 1.64% | 1.58% | 1.32% | 0.44% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.62% | 1.25% | 2.12% | 0.56% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMOG and ACES have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ACES has higher volatility (9.99%) compared to SMOG (7.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMOG dropped -84.39% vs ACES's -79.05%.
On 5-year performance, SMOG leads with 1.76% vs -8.73% for ACES. On fees, ACES is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, SMOG has been the lower-risk option at 7.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, SMOG has performed better with a 1.76% return vs -8.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACES is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for SMOG.
SMOG has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 0.54% for ACES.
SMOG tracks MVIS Global Low Carbon Energy Index, while ACES tracks CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for SMOG and 0.55% for ACES.
ACES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 2.07), 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.
Find the right allocation for SMOG and ACES
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