PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VTWG vs. PBW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VTWG vs. PBW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VTWG achieves a 16.90% return, which is significantly lower than PBW's 48.64% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with VTWG having a 11.33% annualized return and PBW not far behind at 11.06%.


VTWG

1D
-1.35%
1M
4.49%
YTD
16.90%
6M
15.29%
1Y
37.62%
3Y*
18.23%
5Y*
5.70%
10Y*
11.33%

PBW

1D
-3.49%
1M
18.16%
YTD
48.64%
6M
46.91%
1Y
151.19%
3Y*
8.19%
5Y*
-10.05%
10Y*
11.06%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VTWG vs. PBW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VTWG
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF
16.90%13.07%15.15%18.90%-26.49%2.84%34.72%28.75%-9.45%22.27%
PBW
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
48.64%53.96%-30.77%-20.03%-44.55%-29.86%204.82%62.58%-14.11%39.92%

Correlation

The correlation between VTWG and PBW is 0.77, 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

0.77

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

0.78

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

0.80

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

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010

0.77

The correlation between VTWG and PBW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

VTWG vs. PBW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VTWG
PBW

Technology

23.5%
14.3%

Industrials

23.1%
34.3%

Healthcare

22.4%

-

Financial Services

8.2%
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

7.7%
13.9%

Basic Materials

4.2%
16.4%

Energy

3.5%
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
1.1%

Communication Services

2.2%

-

Real Estate

2.1%

-

Utilities

0.7%
6.3%

Technology

VTWG
23.5%
PBW
14.3%

Industrials

VTWG
23.1%
PBW
34.3%

Healthcare

VTWG
22.4%
PBW

-

Financial Services

VTWG
8.2%
PBW
1.4%

Consumer Cyclical

VTWG
7.7%
PBW
13.9%

Basic Materials

VTWG
4.2%
PBW
16.4%

Energy

VTWG
3.5%
PBW
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

VTWG
2.6%
PBW
1.1%

Communication Services

VTWG
2.2%
PBW

-

Real Estate

VTWG
2.1%
PBW

-

Utilities

VTWG
0.7%
PBW
6.3%

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

VTWG vs. PBW — Risk / Return Rank

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

VTWG
VTWG Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
VTWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VTWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
VTWG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
VTWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
VTWG Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

PBW
PBW Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
PBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBW Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
PBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBW Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

VTWG vs. PBW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW). 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.


VTWGPBWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.48

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.54

7.16

-4.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.16

19.88

-10.71

VTWG vs. PBW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VTWG Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is lower than the PBW Sharpe Ratio of 3.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VTWG and PBW, 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


VTWGPBWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.76

3.77

-2.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.23

-0.24

+0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.29

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

-0.03

+0.55

Drawdowns

VTWG vs. PBW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VTWG drawdown since its inception was -42.07%, smaller than the maximum PBW drawdown of -89.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VTWG and PBW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VTWGPBWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.07%

-89.02%

+46.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.88%

-21.24%

+6.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.58%

-68.04%

+39.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.49%

-84.50%

+44.01%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.07%

-89.02%

+46.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.39%

-62.54%

+61.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.53%

-62.91%

+52.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.12%

7.64%

-3.52%

Volatility

VTWG vs. PBW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) is 6.62%, while Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) has a volatility of 13.35%. This indicates that VTWG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VTWGPBWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.62%

13.35%

-6.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.90%

28.20%

-12.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.50%

40.48%

-18.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.52%

42.91%

-18.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.21%

38.76%

-14.55%

VTWG vs. PBW - Expense Ratio Comparison

VTWG has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than PBW's 0.61% expense ratio.


Dividends

VTWG vs. PBW - Dividend Comparison

VTWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, less than PBW's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
PBW
Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
0.60%0.79%2.84%3.68%4.21%1.71%0.44%1.45%2.04%1.28%2.68%1.53%
VTWG
Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF
0.59%0.64%0.55%0.79%0.71%0.54%0.48%0.72%0.72%0.64%0.96%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


VTWG and PBW have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBW has higher volatility (13.35%) compared to VTWG (6.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VTWG dropped -42.07% vs PBW's -89.02%.

On 10-year performance, VTWG leads with 11.33% vs 11.06% for PBW. On fees, VTWG is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, VTWG has been the lower-risk option at 6.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VTWG has performed better with a 11.33% return vs 11.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VTWG is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for PBW.

PBW has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.59% for VTWG.

VTWG tracks Russell 2000 Growth Index, while PBW tracks The WilderHill Clean Energy Index (AMEX). They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for VTWG and 0.61% for PBW.

PBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.77 vs 1.76), 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 VTWG and PBW

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