ACES vs FLGV
ACES vs FLGV
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Franklin US Treasury Bond ETF
Quick Verdict
FLGV has a lower expense ratio. ACES delivered stronger 1-year returns. FLGV offers more diversification with 41 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | FLGV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.09% | |
| AUM | $109M | $1.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 4.11% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 47 | |
| YTD Return | -4.16% | -0.55% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.72% | +1.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -8.79% | +3.06% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.98% | -0.55% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.4% | 5.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -18.4% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Jun 9, 2020 |
ACES vs FLGV Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and Franklin US Treasury Bond ETF (FLGV) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% while FLGV returned +1.27%. Year to date, ACES is down 4.16% versus a loss of 0.55% for FLGV.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -8.79% per year against +3.06% for FLGV; over five years the annualized figures are -13.98% and -0.55% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, ACES has the edge at +3.76% annualized vs -0.92%. 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 5.0% for FLGV. 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 -18.4% for FLGV. 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 0.34. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while FLGV charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $9 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 1.22% against 4.11% for FLGV.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and FLGV share 0 holdings out of 78 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 FLGV?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while FLGV charges 0.09%. FLGV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $46 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or FLGV?
Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% vs +1.27% for FLGV, so ACES leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), ACES annualized +3.76% vs -0.92% for FLGV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or FLGV?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.4% annualized versus 5.0% for FLGV. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs FLGV -18.4%.
Should I hold both ACES and FLGV?
ACES and FLGV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.34, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and FLGV?
ACES and FLGV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 78 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or FLGV?
ACES yields 1.22% while FLGV yields 4.11%, so FLGV 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.