Skip to content

CTEC vs IBAT

Global X CleanTech ETF

CTECCNasdaq

iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF

IBATBNasdaq

Overlap

25.4%by weight

Expense ratio

IBAT −0.03pt a year

CTEC0.50%IBAT0.47%

Avg volume · 30D

IBAT 11.0×the volume

CTEC2.15KIBAT23.8K

CTEC vs IBAT Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

−17.2%CTEC+13.3%IBAT

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. CTEC −17.2%. IBAT +13.3%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%40%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
CTEC 0.50%
IBAT 0.47%, better
Fund size
CTEC $21M
IBAT $56M
1Y total return
CTEC −17.2%
IBAT +13.3%, better
Yield (12M)
CTEC 0.71%
IBAT 0.84%, better
Holdings
CTEC 44
IBAT 97
Avg volume (30D)
CTEC 2.15K sh
IBAT 23.8K sh, better
NAV per share
CTEC $50.22
IBAT $35.92
52W range

ETF.net Grade

CTEC: Cost 70, Risk 32, Mission not scored, Tradability 20, Holdings 27, Durability 19. IBAT: Cost 83, Risk 73, Mission not scored, Tradability 37, Holdings 55, Durability 36.
Pillar letters and Scores for CTEC, IBAT, with each pillar’s weight
PillarCTECIBAT
Cost30% weightA70A83Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightD32A73Higher
Tradability15% weightF20D37Higher
Holdings10% weightD27B55Higher
Durability5% weightF19D36Higher

Rank among Clean Energy funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. CTEC and IBAT are both graded against the same 16 Clean Energy funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Clean Energy⁠

Category · 16 funds
See all 16 ›

IBAT ranks 4th and CTEC 12th of 16 funds in the Clean Energy Category.

  1. Rank 1AICLNiShares Global Clean Energy ETFScore 81
  2. Rank 2AFRNWFidelity Clean Energy ETFScore 77
  3. Rank 3BCNRGState Street SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETFScore 66
  4. Rank 4BIBATiShares Energy Storage & Materials ETFScore 65
  5. Rank 5BFANFirst Trust Global Wind Energy ETFScore 57
  6. Rank 10CSMOGVanEck Low Carbon Energy ETFScore 44
  7. Rank 12CCTECGlobal X CleanTech ETFScore 43
  8. Rank 13DPBDInvesco Global Clean Energy ETFScore 38

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

CTECCGlobal X CleanTech ETF

IBATBiShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF

In short

CTEC Climate tech, not just clean power. CTEC follows a global index of roughly 40 companies working on the technology side of decarbonization, and charges 0.50% a year to do it.

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

CTEC The Fund seeks to track the price and yield performance of the Indxx Global ClimateTech Index before fees and expenses. It invests primarily in index constituents and related depositary receipts.

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

  • CTEC Fee of 0.50% a year lands below the median for its clean-energy peer group.
  • The mandate is global, not a US-only slice: it tracks the Indxx Global ClimateTech Index and can use depositary receipts to reach foreign listings.globalxetfs.com
  • Rules-based and readable: a published index sets the roughly 40 holdings, so there is no manager discretion to decode.
  • IBAT 0.47% a year, cheaper than Global X's DRIV (0.68%) and Amplify's BATT (0.59%).
  • Buys the storage layer, not the showroom: battery technology, hydrogen, fuel cells and the materials that feed them.ishares.com
  • Global mandate, roughly 80 holdings: miners, chemical firms and equipment makers a US large-cap index never touches.
  • Sits in the upper tier of its battery and EV thematic group on our review.

Worth knowing

  • CTEC A small fund that trades thinly, so the bid-ask spread deserves a look before you place an order. It is not one of the category's giants.
  • Roughly 40 stocks on a single theme means individual names and the clean-tech cycle drive the ride, and the swings can be sharp.
  • Distributions come once or twice a year at most. This is a growth theme, not an income line.
  • IBAT One theme, one supply chain. Battery and materials demand drives the whole basket in the same direction at the same time.
  • BlackRock applies business involvement screens, so the portfolio is a filtered slice of the industry rather than the full map.ishares.com
  • Launched in 2024, so the record is short and payouts come once or twice a year at most. Not an income holding.

Full CTEC profile⁠

Full IBAT profile⁠

CTEC vs IBAT Holdings

As of

How CTEC and IBAT differ

Overlap by weight

25.4%

Shared holdings make up 39.3% of CTEC and 26.5% of IBAT.

Level by level

  • Holdings15 in both25.4%
  • Sector5 Sectors48.2%
  • Countryby domicile61.6%
  • Asset classEquity100%

Sector

Sector weights in CTEC and IBAT, widest gap first
SectorMore in CTECMore in IBAT
IndustrialsCTEC +51.4 points
MaterialsIBAT +40.5 points
TechnologyIBAT +10.5 points
Consumer DiscretionaryIBAT +0.8 points
UtilitiesCTEC +0.5 points

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in CTEC and IBAT, widest gap first
CountryMore in CTECMore in IBAT
JapanIBAT +31.7 points
United StatesCTEC +17.4 points
GermanyCTEC +5.1 points
ItalyCTEC +4.5 points
FranceIBAT +4.5 points
DenmarkCTEC +4.4 points
SwedenCTEC +3.8 points
United KingdomCTEC +2.3 points
Other countries (4)IBAT +1.3 points

Outside the US: CTEC 62% developed, 38% emerging. IBAT 68% developed, 32% emerging.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • CTEC56.9%
  • IBAT56.5%

Securities held

  • CTEC41
  • IBAT85

Asset class

CTEC
Equity
IBAT
Equity

Holdings

  • Only in CTEC26
  • In both15
  • Only in IBAT70

Only in CTEC

26 securities, 60.7% of CTEC by weight

  • Trane Technologies PLC6.71%
  • Ge Vernova Inc6.68%
  • Siemens Energy AG6.20%

Only in IBAT

70 securities, 73.3% of IBAT by weight

  • Air Products and Chemicals7.32%
  • Lair Liquide Societe Anonyme Pour7.07%
  • Basf N6.53%

Weight gaps

All 15 Holdings in both funds, largest gap first.

Holding weights in CTEC and IBAT, widest gap first
HoldingMore in CTECMore in IBAT
Eaton Corp PLCETNCTEC +3.09 points
Lg Energy SolutionCTEC +2.74 points
Schneider Electric SECTEC +2.55 points
Contemporary Amperex Techn-HCTEC +1.73 points
Enphase Energy IncENPHCTEC +0.88 points
Bloom Energy Corp- ABEIBAT +0.83 points
Doosan Fuel Cell Co LtdCTEC +0.60 points
Plug Power IncPLUGCTEC +0.51 points

All 40 CTEC holdings⁠All 82 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.

CTEC vs IBAT Cost

Overpaying CTEC vs IBAT

$561

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • CTEC 0.50%

    $9,979

  • IBAT 0.47%

    $9,418

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • CTEC 0.50%
  • IBAT 0.47%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$2K$4K$6K$8K$10K051015202530CTEC $9,979IBAT $9,418

Year by year

YearCTECIBATOverpaying
10$900$847$53
20$3,460$3,261$199
30$9,979$9,418$561

Expense ratio

  • 0.50%CTEC
  • 0.47%IBAT, cheaper
  • Middle half of Clean Energy funds
  • Median 0.59%

IBAT 4th cheapest of 16 funds

CTEC 5th cheapest of 16 funds

CTEC vs IBAT Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Yield (12M)
CTEC 0.71%
IBAT 0.84%, better
Payout (12M)
CTEC $0.35
IBAT $0.30
Last payment
CTEC $0.07
IBAT $0.18
Ex-dividend
CTEC Jun 29, 2026
IBAT Jun 15, 2026
Paid on
CTEC Jul 7, 2026
IBAT Jun 18, 2026
Frequency
CTEC Twice a year
IBAT Twice a year

Distribution history

Per share, 2020 to 2026, same scale for both

CTECTwice a year · 9 paymentsAll CTEC payments⁠
One bar per payment. 9 payments from 2020 to 2026 YTD. Dec 30, 2020 $0.02; Jun 29, 2022 $0.05; Dec 29, 2022 $0.13; Dec 28, 2023 $0.28; Jun 27, 2024 $0.13; Dec 30, 2024 $0.40; Jun 27, 2025 $0.12; Dec 30, 2025 $0.28; Jun 29, 2026 $0.07. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$0.25202020232026YTD
IBATTwice a year · 5 paymentsAll IBAT payments⁠
One bar per payment. 5 payments from 2020 to 2026 YTD. Jun 11, 2024 $0.18; Dec 17, 2024 $0.12; Jun 16, 2025 $0.21; Dec 16, 2025 $0.12; Jun 15, 2026 $0.18. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$0.25202020232026YTD

CTEC vs IBAT Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
CTEC 37.3%IBAT 30.2%since Apr 2024
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
CTEC 0.18IBAT 0.48since Apr 2024
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
CTEC −76.5%IBAT −28.2%since Mar 2024
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
CTEC 2.06IBAT 1.57

CTEC and IBAT in the news

Popular comparisons

  • CTECCvsICLNA

    Global X CleanTech ETF · iShares Global Clean Energy ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.38%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • IBATBvsICLNA

    iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF · iShares Global Clean Energy ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.47% · 0.38%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • CTECCvsFRNWA

    Global X CleanTech ETF · Fidelity Clean Energy ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.39%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • IBATBvsFRNWA

    iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF · Fidelity Clean Energy ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.47% · 0.39%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • CTECCvsCNRGB

    Global X CleanTech ETF · State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.50% · 0.45%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • IBATBvsCNRGB

    iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF · State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.47% · 0.45%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.