ICLN vs XLB: Correlation & Overlap
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and Materials Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLB) carry a correlation of 0.45, a moderate link. By holdings, the two funds overlap 0% by weight.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are ICLN and XLB?
Across a 3-year window, the weekly returns of ICLN and XLB correlate at 0.45, moderate. Lately the two have drifted apart, with the 1-year correlation at 0.22 versus 0.45 over 3 years. Stretching to 5 years gives 0.55, with an annualized covariance of 178.7 %².
Within ICLN's tracked universe of 78 assets, XLB comes in at #40 by 3-year correlation. The trailing year gives ICLN the advantage: +25.6% versus +17.6%, a 8.0-point spread. This link changes with the market regime, having swung between 0.26 and 0.76 on a rolling one-year basis.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
ICLN vs XLB: side by side
| ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) | XLB (Materials Select Sector SPDR Fund) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | +25.6% | +17.6% |
| 5-year return | -18.4% | +36.9% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 24.0% | 16.7% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.78 | 0.72 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -34.6% | -23.2% |
| Dividend yield | 1.05% | 1.68% |
| Expense ratio | 0.39% | 0.08% |
| Assets under management | $2.3B | $8.3B |
| Sector / category | ETF · Thematic | Sector ETF |
On the fund side, ICLN sits in the Miscellaneous Sector category at iShares, with $2.3B under management, 102 holdings, a 0.39% expense ratio, a 1.05% trailing dividend yield. XLB is a Natural Resources fund from State Street Investment Management: $8.3B under management, 26 holdings, a 0.08% expense ratio, a 1.68% trailing dividend yield.
Portfolio overlap between ICLN and XLB
The two portfolios are largely distinct: 0% of the funds' weight sits in the same underlying holdings (0 common positions). Correlation tells you they move together; overlap tells you why.
Largest positions held only by ICLN: FSLR (7.87%), 600900 (7.64%), BE (7.36%), NXT (6.81%), ENPH (4.70%). Only by XLB: LIN (12.94%), NEM (8.02%), FCX (6.48%), SHW (4.87%), ECL (4.80%).
Overlap = sum of the smaller of the two weights across common holdings, from issuer disclosures as of 2026-08-26.
Year-by-year returns
| Year | ICLN | XLB |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -5.4% | -12.3% |
| 2023 | -20.4% | +12.5% |
| 2024 | -25.7% | +0.1% |
| 2025 | +47.0% | +9.9% |
| 2026 | +8.8% | +18.3% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are ICLN and XLB good diversifiers for each other?
Reasonably. At 0.45, ICLN and XLB keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
FAQ
What is the correlation between ICLN and XLB?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between ICLN and XLB is 0.45 over 3 years, 0.22 over 1 year and 0.55 over 5 years.
Is XLB a good diversifier for ICLN?
Reasonably. At 0.45, ICLN and XLB keep a meaningful degree of independence, and combining them has historically reduced portfolio volatility.
How much do ICLN and XLB overlap?
The two funds share 0 holdings amounting to 0% of weight, per issuer portfolio files dated 2026-08-26.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/icln-vs-xlb.json
Embed this badge (it refreshes with the data), with attribution:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/icln-vs-xlb/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: ICLN correlations · XLB correlations
