ICLN VS PBW: A Comprehensive Comparison of ETFs
4 min read
By Ron Koren, ETF Insider

ICLN VS PBW: A Comprehensive Comparison of ETFs

The transition to renewable energy is not just an environmental imperative but also an emerging investment opportunity. In this article, we will contrast two key players in the clean energy ETF space: ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) and PBW (Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF). We'll delve into their tickers, full names, issuers, sectors, top holdings, capitalization, strategy, tracking, and exposure.

ICLN VS PBW: Overview

ICLN and PBW both focus on the clean energy sector but differ in their scope and investment strategies. ICLN has a global outlook, targeting companies worldwide, whereas PBW focuses more on U.S. companies. These nuances can lead to different risk and return profiles, something investors should carefully consider.

ICLN VS PBW: Issuers and Investment Objectives

ICLN is managed by BlackRock’s iShares and aims to replicate the performance of the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. PBW, managed by Invesco, seeks to match the WilderHill Clean Energy Index. Each issuer brings its unique investment philosophy into these ETFs, making it crucial to understand these subtleties when investing.

ICLN overlap ICLN VS PBW: A Comprehensive Comparison of ETFsICLN overlap ICLN VS PBW: A Comprehensive Comparison of ETFs

ICLN VS PBW: Sectors and Top Holdings

ICLN is diversified across multiple sectors like solar, wind, and hydroelectric power, with top holdings in companies like Plug Power and Enphase Energy. PBW also covers a broad range of clean energy sectors but leans heavily on technology-driven companies like Tesla. Knowing the top holdings and sectoral focus can help investors align their portfolios with their specific investment and ethical goals.

ICLN VS PBW: Capitalization and Asset Under Management

ICLN generally has a higher Asset Under Management (AUM), making it a more liquid option. PBW, though smaller in AUM, offers a more concentrated bet on clean energy disruptors. The difference in capitalization and AUM can offer insights into the market's overall sentiment and the funds' liquidity.

ICLN VS PBW: Tracking and Strategy

Both ICLN and PBW employ a passive management strategy. However, ICLN's broader geographical scope means its tracking index is more diversified. PBW, on the other hand, offers a focused approach, closely tracking a niche index. Understanding these strategic differences is crucial for investors looking to diversify or specialize their exposure to clean energy.

ICLN VS PBW: Exposure and Risk Profile

ICLN offers more global exposure, making it suitable for those looking to diversify geographically. PBW provides a concentrated exposure to the U.S. market, which can be more volatile but offers potentially higher returns. Therefore, the investor's risk tolerance and desire for international exposure should guide the choice between these two ETFs.

Conclusion

Both ICLN and PBW offer unique investment opportunities in the growing clean energy sector. However, they differ in scope, strategy, and risk profile. For those interested in digging deeper into these ETFs, the ETF Insider app offers a comprehensive look into holdings, correlations, overlaps, and much more, all through a user-friendly interface.

Disclaimer: This article does not provide any investment advisory services.

ICLN ETF issuer
ICLN ETF official page

ICLN quote and analysis

Discover the top holdings, correlations, and overlaps of ETFs using our visualization tool.
Our app allows you to build and track your portfolio.
To learn more about the ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF, access our dedicated page now.

Get started