Screener
EFRA vs PBW
iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF vs Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
Key differences
- EFRA costs 0.17% less per year.
- PBW is significantly larger than EFRA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- EFRA covers global markets; PBW covers north america.
- Over the last 3 years, EFRA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- PBW has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| EFRA | PBW | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.47% | 0.64% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $6M | $447M |
| Since | 2022 | 2005 |
| Dividend yield | 1.56% | 0.71% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +10.4% | +150.5% |
| CAGR 3Y | +11.4% | +7.2% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | -8.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.57 | 0.29 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.03% | 40.29% |
| Max drawdown | -16.25% | -89.06% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to EFRA and PBW
Explore further