ACES vs FQAL
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Fidelity Quality Factor ETF
Quick Verdict
FQAL has a lower expense ratio. FQAL delivered stronger 1-year returns. FQAL offers more diversification with 130 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | FQAL | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $124M | $1.4B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.73% | 1.15% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 130 | |
| YTD Return | -9.18% | +12.67% | |
| 1Y Return | +5.15% | +18.32% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -7.81% | +20.16% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -14.46% | +11.60% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.3% | 15.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -34.1% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Fidelity Investments (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Sep 12, 2016 |
ACES vs FQAL Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) is a ETF from Fidelity Investments (US). Over the past year ACES returned +5.15% while FQAL returned +18.32%. Year to date, ACES is down 9.18% versus a gain of 12.67% for FQAL.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -7.81% per year against +20.16% for FQAL; over five years the annualized figures are -14.46% and +11.60% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, FQAL has the edge at +13.76% annualized vs +3.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACES has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.3% compared with 15.0% for FQAL. 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 -34.1% for FQAL. 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 0.62. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while FQAL 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 0.73% against 1.15% for FQAL.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and FQAL share 0 holdings out of 162 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 FQAL?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while FQAL charges 0.15%. FQAL is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $40 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or FQAL?
Over the past year ACES returned +5.15% vs +18.32% for FQAL, so FQAL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), ACES annualized +3.06% vs +13.76% for FQAL. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or FQAL?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.3% annualized versus 15.0% for FQAL. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs FQAL -34.1%.
Should I hold both ACES and FQAL?
ACES and FQAL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and FQAL?
ACES and FQAL share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 162 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or FQAL?
ACES yields 0.73% while FQAL yields 1.15%, so FQAL 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.