ACES vs BBEM
ACES vs BBEM
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs JPMorgan BetaBuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF
Quick Verdict
BBEM has a lower expense ratio. BBEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. BBEM offers more diversification with 889 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | BBEM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $109M | $748M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 2.52% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 1,132 | |
| YTD Return | -4.16% | +15.82% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.72% | +32.69% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -8.79% | +19.42% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.98% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.4% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -17.4% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | May 10, 2023 |
ACES vs BBEM Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and JPMorgan BetaBuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM) is a ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% while BBEM returned +32.69%. Year to date, ACES is down 4.16% versus a gain of 15.82% for BBEM.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -8.79% per year against +19.42% for BBEM. Across the full 3-year window we track, BBEM has the edge at +19.55% annualized vs +3.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACES has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.4% compared with 15.1% for BBEM. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -79.0% for ACES and -17.4% for BBEM. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.61. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while BBEM charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $15 annually, a gap of $40 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 1.22% against 2.52% for BBEM.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and BBEM share 0 holdings out of 926 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACES or BBEM?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while BBEM charges 0.15%. BBEM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $40 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or BBEM?
Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% vs +32.69% for BBEM, so BBEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), ACES annualized +3.76% vs +19.55% for BBEM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or BBEM?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.4% annualized versus 15.1% for BBEM. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs BBEM -17.4%.
Should I hold both ACES and BBEM?
ACES and BBEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and BBEM?
ACES and BBEM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 926 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or BBEM?
ACES yields 1.22% while BBEM yields 2.52%, so BBEM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.