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