Screener
ACES vs CCNR
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF
Key differences
- CCNR costs 0.16% less per year.
- CCNR is significantly larger than ACES — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- ACES covers north america markets; CCNR covers global.
- ACES follows a index tracking strategy; CCNR uses active selection.
- ACES has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| ACES | CCNR | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.55% | 0.39% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $127M | $394M |
| Since | 2018 | 2024 |
| Dividend yield | 0.64% | 2.77% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | global |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +55.8% | +72.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | -2.1% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | -8.4% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.00 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 32.30% | 17.69% |
| Max drawdown | -79.05% | -20.06% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to ACES and CCNR
Explore further