ACES vs TYLG
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
ACES has a lower expense ratio. TYLG delivered stronger 1-year returns. TYLG offers more diversification with 78 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | TYLG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.60% | |
| AUM | $124M | $15M | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.73% | 8.89% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 78 | |
| YTD Return | -8.47% | +20.94% | |
| 1Y Return | +9.25% | +34.81% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -7.47% | +23.52% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.68% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.3% | 15.8% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -24.5% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Nov 21, 2022 |
ACES vs TYLG Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year ACES returned +9.25% while TYLG returned +34.81%. Year to date, ACES is down 8.47% versus a gain of 20.94% for TYLG.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -7.47% per year against +23.52% for TYLG. Across the full 4-year window we track, TYLG has the edge at +25.07% annualized vs +3.16%. 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 15.8% for TYLG. 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 -24.5% for TYLG. 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 0.57. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while TYLG charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $60 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 0.73% against 8.89% for TYLG.
Holdings Overlap
ACES and TYLG share 1 holdings out of 110 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in ACES | Weight in TYLG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| FSLR | 4.51% | 0.08% | 4.43% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACES or TYLG?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while TYLG charges 0.60%. ACES is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or TYLG?
Over the past year ACES returned +9.25% vs +34.81% for TYLG, so TYLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), ACES annualized +3.16% vs +25.07% for TYLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or TYLG?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.3% annualized versus 15.8% for TYLG. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs TYLG -24.5%.
Should I hold both ACES and TYLG?
ACES and TYLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.57, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACES and TYLG?
ACES and TYLG share 1 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 110 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or TYLG?
ACES yields 0.73% while TYLG yields 8.89%, so TYLG 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.