VCLN vs. CRAK

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

VCLN (Virtus Duff & Phelps Clean Energy ETF) and CRAK (VanEck Oil Refiners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VCLN is a Sustainable fund actively managed by Virtus Investment Partners, while CRAK is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Oil Refiners Index. VCLN is actively managed, while CRAK is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, VCLN returned 12.22%/yr vs 23.02%/yr for CRAK. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. VCLN charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for CRAK.

Performance

VCLN vs. CRAK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus Duff & Phelps Clean Energy ETF (VCLN) and VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VCLN achieves a 13.17% return, which is significantly lower than CRAK's 38.54% return.

VCLN

• 1D: -2.57%
• 1M: -10.99%
• 6M: 7.84%
• YTD: 13.17%
• 1Y: 48.20%
• 3Y*: 12.22%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CRAK

• 1D: 3.24%
• 1M: 7.18%
• 6M: 31.68%
• YTD: 38.54%
• 1Y: 53.31%
• 3Y*: 23.02%
• 5Y*: 16.83%
• 10Y*: 13.95%

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

VCLN vs. CRAK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
VCLN Virtus Duff & Phelps Clean Energy ETF	13.17%	55.75%	-6.69%	-17.54%	-7.87%	-5.21%
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	38.54%	39.11%	-15.05%	13.73%	19.10%	-0.23%

Correlation

The correlation between VCLN and CRAK is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2021	0.37

Over the past year, the correlation between VCLN and CRAK has dropped to 0.14 - well below their long-term average of 0.37, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

VCLN vs. CRAK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VCLN	CRAK
Industrials	36.1%	4.0%
Utilities	33.5%	-
Technology	29.6%	-
Energy	0.8%	98.8%
Basic Materials	-	1.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

VCLN vs. CRAK — Risk / Return Rank

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

VCLN

VCLN Risk / Return Rank: 59
VCLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
VCLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
VCLN Omega Ratio Rank: 53
VCLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
VCLN Martin Ratio Rank: 64

CRAK

CRAK Risk / Return Rank: 89
CRAK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
CRAK Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
CRAK Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CRAK Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
CRAK Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

VCLN vs. CRAK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus Duff & Phelps Clean Energy ETF (VCLN) and VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK). 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.

	VCLN	CRAK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	2.73	-1.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.21	3.63	-1.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.45	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	3.94	-1.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.06	12.83	-3.76

VCLN vs. CRAK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VCLN Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is lower than the CRAK Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VCLN and CRAK, 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

VCLN vs. CRAK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VCLN drawdown since its inception was -45.66%, smaller than the maximum CRAK drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VCLN and CRAK.

Drawdown Indicators

	VCLN	CRAK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.66%	-58.80%	+13.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.62%	-13.59%	-6.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.25%	-35.61%	+6.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-58.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.62%	0.00%	-19.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.82%	-12.45%	-11.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.33%	4.18%	+1.15%

Volatility

VCLN vs. CRAK - Volatility Comparison

Virtus Duff & Phelps Clean Energy ETF (VCLN) has a higher volatility of 10.18% compared to VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) at 7.32%. This indicates that VCLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRAK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VCLN	CRAK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.18%	7.32%	+2.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.38%	15.55%	+6.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.05%	19.64%	+11.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.74%	20.75%	+6.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.74%	22.19%	+5.55%

VCLN vs. CRAK - Expense Ratio Comparison

VCLN has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than CRAK's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

VCLN vs. CRAK - Dividend Comparison

VCLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, more than CRAK's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	1.46%	2.02%	5.60%	3.65%	3.08%	2.40%	2.64%	1.49%	2.42%	1.66%	3.42%	0.47%
VCLN Virtus Duff & Phelps Clean Energy ETF	1.85%	2.01%	1.16%	1.14%	0.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VCLN and CRAK in my portfolio?

VCLN and CRAK have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VCLN or CRAK?

VCLN has higher volatility (10.18%) compared to CRAK (7.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VCLN dropped -45.66% vs CRAK's -58.80%.

Which ETF is better, VCLN or CRAK?

On 3-year performance, CRAK leads with 23.02% vs 12.22% for VCLN. On fees, VCLN is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, CRAK has been the lower-risk option at 7.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VCLN or CRAK?

Over the 3-year period, CRAK has performed better with a 23.02% return vs 12.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VCLN or CRAK?

VCLN is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for CRAK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VCLN or CRAK?

VCLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 1.46% for CRAK.

What is the main difference between VCLN and CRAK?

VCLN is categorized as Sustainable, while CRAK is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Virtus Investment Partners and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for VCLN and 0.62% for CRAK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CRAK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 1.56), 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.