XME vs. ICLN

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

XME (SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XME is a Materials fund tracking the S&P Metals & Mining Select Industry Index, while ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XME returned 19.09%/yr vs 11.27%/yr for ICLN. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XME charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ICLN.

Performance

XME vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) 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, XME achieves a 14.53% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 27.81% return. Over the past 10 years, XME has outperformed ICLN with an annualized return of 19.09%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively lower 11.27% annualized return.

XME

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: -1.95%
• YTD: 14.53%
• 6M: 20.99%
• 1Y: 84.92%
• 3Y*: 35.78%
• 5Y*: 21.45%
• 10Y*: 19.09%

ICLN

• 1D: -1.50%
• 1M: -0.76%
• YTD: 27.81%
• 6M: 26.73%
• 1Y: 65.16%
• 3Y*: 5.80%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: 11.27%

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

XME vs. ICLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XME SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF	14.53%	83.47%	-4.54%	21.51%	13.13%	34.92%	15.95%	14.69%	-26.78%	21.17%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	27.81%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%

Correlation

The correlation between XME and ICLN is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.58

The correlation between XME and ICLN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

XME vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XME	ICLN
Basic Materials	75.3%	1.1%
Energy	23.4%	26.4%
Technology	2.2%	11.1%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	-
Industrials	0.4%	27.8%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.1%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	32.8%

Return for Risk

XME vs. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

XME

XME Risk / Return Rank: 72
XME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
XME Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
XME Omega Ratio Rank: 70
XME Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
XME Martin Ratio Rank: 59

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 80
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

XME vs. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) 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.

	XME	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.38	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	2.93	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.37	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.78	5.66	-1.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.55	16.11	-6.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XME vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XME Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XME 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XME	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.38	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66	0.00	+0.65
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.41	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.16	-0.09	+0.26

Drawdowns

XME vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XME drawdown since its inception was -85.89%, roughly equal to the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XME and ICLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	XME	ICLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.89%	-87.15%	+1.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.60%	-11.58%	-11.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.47%	-43.18%	+12.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.27%	-57.16%	+19.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.69%	-66.75%	+5.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.72%	-42.82%	+32.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.12%	-66.59%	+22.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.92%	4.06%	+4.86%

Volatility

XME vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) has a higher volatility of 14.01% compared to iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) at 12.28%. This indicates that XME's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XME	ICLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.01%	12.28%	+1.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.83%	21.81%	+6.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.60%	27.62%	+7.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.72%	27.43%	+5.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.91%	27.31%	+5.60%

XME vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

XME has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than ICLN's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

XME vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

XME's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than ICLN's 1.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.28%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%
XME SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF	0.32%	0.38%	0.65%	1.00%	1.64%	0.70%	0.99%	2.43%	2.23%	1.15%	1.02%	2.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XME and ICLN in my portfolio?

XME and ICLN have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XME or ICLN?

XME has higher volatility (14.01%) compared to ICLN (12.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XME dropped -85.89% vs ICLN's -87.15%.

Which ETF is better, XME or ICLN?

On 10-year performance, XME leads with 19.09% vs 11.27% for ICLN. On fees, XME is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, ICLN has been the lower-risk option at 12.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XME or ICLN?

Over the 10-year period, XME has performed better with a 19.09% return vs 11.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XME or ICLN?

XME is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ICLN.

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

ICLN has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.32% for XME.

What is the main difference between XME and ICLN?

XME is categorized as Materials, while ICLN is Alternative Energy Equities. XME tracks S&P Metals & Mining Select Industry Index, while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XME and 0.39% for ICLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XME currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.38), 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.