IBAT ranks 4th and ACES 7th of 16 funds in the Clean Energy Category.
ACES vs IBAT
IBAT −0.08pt a year
0.55%0.47%
ACES 2.2×the volume
51.9K23.8K
ACES vs IBAT Performance
−23.6%+12.9%
- ACES 0.55%
- IBAT 0.47%, better
- ACES $87M
- IBAT $56M
- ACES −23.6%
- IBAT +12.9%, better
- ACES 0.70%
- IBAT 0.85%, better
- ACES 38
- IBAT 97
- ACES 51.9K sh, better
- IBAT 23.8K sh
- ACES $25.98
- IBAT $35.92
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | ACES | IBAT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B60 | A83Higher |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | D28 | A74Higher |
| Tradability | B60Higher | D37 |
| Holdings | B59Higher | B56 |
| Durability | C49Higher | D36 |
Rank among Clean Energy funds
Same Category. ACES and IBAT are both graded against the same 16 Clean Energy funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
ACESC
IBATB
In short
ACES Most clean energy funds cast a global net. This one stays on the continent: a passive, roughly 40-stock index of U.S. and Canadian renewables and clean tech, running since 2018.
IBAT Most EV funds buy carmakers. IBAT drops a layer down the supply chain to the batteries, hydrogen, fuel cells and storage materials underneath, tracking a global STOXX index at a fee that undercuts much of its thematic peer group.
Stated mandate
ACES ACES seeks to track the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index before fees and expenses. It uses passive indexing to provide exposure to U.S. and Canadian companies involved in renewables and clean technology.
IBAT The fund seeks to track an index of global companies involved in battery technologies, hydrogen, fuel cells, and other energy-storage solutions. It provides targeted exposure to companies supporting the transition to a low-carbon economy.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
ACES vs IBAT Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
ACES vs IBAT Cost
Overpaying ACES vs IBAT
$1,486
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
ACES 0.55%
$10,904
IBAT 0.47%
$9,418
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | ACES | IBAT | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $988 | $847 | $141 |
| 20 | $3,790 | $3,261 | $529 |
| 30 | $10,904 | $9,418 | $1,486 |
- 0.55%ACES
- 0.47%IBAT, cheaper
- Middle half of Clean Energy funds
- Median 0.59%
IBAT 4th cheapest of 16 funds
ACES 7th cheapest of 16 funds
ACES vs IBAT Dividends
- ACES 0.70%
- IBAT 0.85%, better
- ACES $0.19
- IBAT $0.30
- ACES $0.07
- IBAT $0.18
- ACES Sep 17, 2026
- IBAT Jun 15, 2026
- ACES Sep 22, 2026
- IBAT Jun 18, 2026
- ACES Quarterly
- IBAT Twice a year
Distribution history
ACES vs IBAT Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- ACES 30.5%IBAT 30.2%
- Return per unit of risk
- ACES −0.11IBAT 0.48
- Worst fall
- ACES −74.2%IBAT −28.2%
- Market sensitivity
- ACES 1.46IBAT 1.57
ACES and IBAT in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.55% · 0.38%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.47% · 0.38%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.55% · 0.39%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.47% · 0.39%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.55% · 0.45%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.47% · 0.45%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
