ACES vs FFLV
ACES vs FFLV
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF
Quick Verdict
FFLV has a lower expense ratio. FFLV delivered stronger 1-year returns. FFLV offers more diversification with 105 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | FFLV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.38% | |
| AUM | $109M | $16M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 1.41% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 119 | |
| YTD Return | -4.16% | +17.97% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.72% | +32.15% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -8.79% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.98% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.4% | 12.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -16.7% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Fidelity Investments (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Feb 9, 2024 |
ACES vs FFLV Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF (FFLV) is a ETF from Fidelity Investments (US). Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% while FFLV returned +32.15%. Year to date, ACES is down 4.16% versus a gain of 17.97% for FFLV.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACES has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.4% compared with 12.3% for FFLV. 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 -16.7% for FFLV. 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 0.27. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while FFLV charges 0.38%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $38 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 1.22% against 1.41% for FFLV.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and FFLV share 0 holdings out of 142 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 FFLV?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while FFLV charges 0.38%. FFLV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $17 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or FFLV?
Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% vs +32.15% for FFLV, so FFLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), ACES annualized +3.76% vs +17.62% for FFLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or FFLV?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.4% annualized versus 12.3% for FFLV. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs FFLV -16.7%.
Should I hold both ACES and FFLV?
ACES and FFLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.27, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and FFLV?
ACES and FFLV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 142 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or FFLV?
ACES yields 1.22% while FFLV yields 1.41%, so FFLV 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.