ACES vs SBIO
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF
Quick Verdict
SBIO has a lower expense ratio. SBIO delivered stronger 1-year returns. SBIO offers more diversification with 105 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | SBIO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.50% | |
| AUM | $109M | $202M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 4.05% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 87 | |
| YTD Return | -3.74% | +33.77% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.63% | +104.83% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -7.82% | +32.41% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.74% | +9.72% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.4% | 29.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -63.1% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | ALPS Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Dec 30, 2014 |
ACES vs SBIO Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF (SBIO) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors. Over the past year ACES returned +20.63% while SBIO returned +104.83%. Year to date, ACES is down 3.74% versus a gain of 33.77% for SBIO.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -7.82% per year against +32.41% for SBIO; over five years the annualized figures are -13.74% and +9.72% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, SBIO has the edge at +9.71% annualized vs +3.81%. 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 29.6% for SBIO. 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 -63.1% for SBIO. 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 0.54. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while SBIO charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $50 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 1.22% against 4.05% for SBIO.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and SBIO 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 SBIO?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while SBIO charges 0.50%. SBIO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or SBIO?
Over the past year ACES returned +20.63% vs +104.83% for SBIO, so SBIO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), ACES annualized +3.81% vs +9.71% for SBIO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or SBIO?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.4% annualized versus 29.6% for SBIO. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs SBIO -63.1%.
Should I hold both ACES and SBIO?
ACES and SBIO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.54, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and SBIO?
ACES and SBIO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 142 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or SBIO?
ACES yields 1.22% while SBIO yields 4.05%, so SBIO 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.