Data as of . Every figure is the themes desk's own, on published data.
ICLN vs PAVE
0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, ICLN and PAVE hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in ICLN | Only in PAVE |
|---|---|
| BLOOM ENERGY CORPORATION 13.79% | QUANTA SERVICES, INC. 4.18% |
| NEXTPOWER INC. 7.31% | CSX Corporation 3.48% |
| FIRST SOLAR, INC. 7.18% | EATON CORPORATION PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 3.30% |
| China Yangtze Power Co., Ltd. 5.92% | HOWMET AEROSPACE INC. 3.27% |
| VESTAS WIND SYSTEMS A/S 3.38% | TRANE TECHNOLOGIES PLC 3.19% |
| PLUG POWER INC. 3.29% | UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION 3.12% |
| ENPHASE ENERGY, INC. 3.26% | NUCOR CORPORATION 3.10% |
| EQUATORIAL S.A. 2.90% | ROCKWELL AUTOMATION, INC. 2.92% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings as filed for Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | vs the S&P 500 | vs the Nasdaq-100 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICLN | PAVE | ICLN | PAVE | ICLN | PAVE | |
| 3 months | −16.4% | −2.5% | −21.1 pts | −7.2 pts | −18.5 pts | −4.6 pts |
| 6 months | +2.2% | +7.1% | −12.9 pts | −8.0 pts | −17.9 pts | −13.0 pts |
| 1 year | +25.3% | +19.3% | +5.3 pts | −0.7 pts | −0.3 pts | −6.3 pts |
| 3 years | +17.5% | +77.6% | −60.4 pts | −0.4 pts | −75.9 pts | −15.9 pts |
| Since launch | +10.6% | +297.3% | −800.8 pts | +19.0 pts | −1673.5 pts | −189.6 pts |
| ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF | PAVE Global X U.S. Infrastructure Development ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | iShares | Global X |
| Theme | Clean energy | Infrastructure |
| In the S&P 500 | 7.2% | 62.1% |
| Active share vs the S&P 500 | 100.0% | 97.2% |
| In the Nasdaq-100 | 0.0% | 6.2% |
| Holdings | 122 | 100 |
| Top ten, share of the fund | 51.8% | 32.3% |
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.47% |
| Fee for the differing part | 0.38% | 0.48% |
| Total return, 1 year | +25.3% | +19.3% |
| vs the S&P 500 | +5.3 pts | −0.7 pts |
| vs the Nasdaq-100 | −0.3 pts | −6.3 pts |
| Below its high | −42.8% | −7.9% |
ICLN in plain words
By weight, 7% of ICLN's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 52% of the fund across 122 positions, as filed for Apr 30, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +25.3% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was ahead by 5.3 pts. It sits 42.8% below its all-time high of Jan 7, 2021.
PAVE in plain words
By weight, 62% of PAVE's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 97%. The top ten holdings are 32% of the fund across 100 positions, as filed for May 31, 2026. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 the fund returned +19.3% with distributions reinvested against +20.0% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 0.7 pts. It sits 7.9% below its all-time high of Jun 25, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Do ICLN and PAVE hold the same stocks?
- By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight, which is mostly different names. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
- Which is more different from the S&P 500, ICLN or PAVE?
- ICLN has 7% of its weight in S&P 500 names and PAVE has 62%, so ICLN differs more from the index.
- Which is cheaper, ICLN or PAVE?
- ICLN charges 0.38% a year and PAVE charges 0.47%, so ICLN is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, ICLN against PAVE, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/ICLN-PAVE.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.