ETF Comparison

GRID vs PWER: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund and Nomura Energy Transition ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated August 14, 2026

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
Metric	GRID	PWER
Full name	First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund	Nomura Energy Transition ETF
Issuer	First Trust	Nomura
Last Close	$187.87 as of August 14, 2026	$45.05 as of August 14, 2026
Distribution yield	0.76%	0.54%
Distribution Safety Score™	78	92
Expense ratio	0.57%	0.79%
AUM	$12.2B	$12.6M
Distribution frequency	Quarterly	Quarterly
Underlying index	Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index	—
Objective	Seeks investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield of the Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index.	—
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	11/16/2009	11/28/2023
Beta	1.44	1.0111
Last dividend	$0.7560	$0.0610
Ex-dividend date	06/25/2026	06/22/2026

Bottom lineGRID and PWER are nearly interchangeable — both offer very similar thematic exposure with very similar cost and risk. The clearest tie-breaker is cost: GRID is cheaper at 0.57% vs 0.79%.

Model this comparison:

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

First Trust

ETFs306

Total AUM$285B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

First Trust operates a broad multi-strategy ETF platform with 50 funds spanning allocation, income, alternatives, and thematic investing. The issuer focuses heavily on specialized income strategies, including dividend funds, covered call strategies (Buffer series), and sector-specific income plays, alongside factor-based and alternative investments. Notable tickers like FDN (tech), FAN (clean energy), and the Buffer series (BUFD, BUFQ, BUFR) reflect the issuer's emphasis on income generation and downside protection strategies across diverse market segments.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on GRID.

See all First Trust ETFs

Nomura

ETFs7

Total AUM$663M

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on PWER.

See all Nomura ETFs

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — free to start, no credit card.

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

GRID has lagged PWER over the trailing twelve months, posting a 31.28% total return against 51.94%. Measured from Nov 2023 — when the younger fund began trading — GRID has compounded at 29.37% a year versus 25.39% for PWER. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
Symbol	YTD	1Y	Since Nov 2023	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
GRID	21.13%	31.28%	29.37%	23.2%	0.98	1.40	-15.8%
PWER	26.39%	51.94%	25.39%	21.8%	1.71	2.45	-13.7%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date, split-adjusted, as of August 14, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; longer windows are annualized. “Since Nov 2023” measures every fund from November 29, 2023 — the youngest fund's first trading day — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the past year. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the past year) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Quick verdict

GRID (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund) and PWER (Nomura Energy Transition ETF) are both quarterly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

GRID offers the higher yield at 0.76% vs 0.54% for PWER. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

GRID is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.57% compared to 0.79%.

GRID is the larger fund by assets ($12.2B), which generally means tighter spreads and better liquidity.

Who should choose each?

Choose GRID

First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund

Want broad equity exposure.
Want to keep costs low — a 0.57% expense ratio vs 0.79% for PWER.

Choose PWER

Nomura Energy Transition ETF

Want broad equity exposure.
Prefer lower volatility — a beta of 1.0 vs 1.4 for GRID.

Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.

Still deciding? Track GRID & PWER for free

Create a free Dividend Vision account to keep them on a watchlist, get notified when they declare dividends, and see how much income they would add to your portfolio.

Add to my watchlist See what a free account includes

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, GRID would generate roughly $6.33/month, while PWER would produce $4.50/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay quarterly distributions.

GRID yield0.76%

PWER yield0.54%

Monthly diff on $10K$1.83

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, GRID would cost approximately $570 in fees vs $790 for PWER (simplified, not compounded). The $220.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

GRID ER0.57%

PWER ER0.79%

Strategy & risk

GRID tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index with an electrification approach, while PWER is an ETF. Beta is 1.44 for GRID and 1.0111 for PWER, indicating PWER is less volatile relative to the market.

GRID beta1.44

PWER beta1.0111

Fund details

GRID is managed by First Trust (launched 11/16/2009) with $12.2B in assets. PWER is managed by Nomura (launched 11/28/2023) with $12.6M in assets.

GRID AUM$12.2B

PWER AUM$12.6M

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution yield for GRID and PWER?

GRID currently distributes 0.76% and PWER 0.54%, based on fund data updated August 2026. Distribution yield moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is GRID or PWER better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. GRID currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between GRID and PWER?

GRID (First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund) tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index with an electrification approach, while PWER (Nomura Energy Transition ETF) is an ETF. They are issued by First Trust and Nomura respectively.

Can I hold both GRID and PWER?

Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.

Is GRID or PWER safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — PWER scores 92, GRID scores 78, so PWER's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. PWER has also shown lower price volatility (beta 1.01 vs 1.44 for GRID). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.

Which has lower fees, GRID or PWER?

GRID has an expense ratio of 0.57% while PWER charges 0.79%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in GRID vs PWER generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in GRID would generate roughly $6.33 per month ($76.00 annually). The same in PWER would produce about $4.50 per month ($54.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, GRID or PWER?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare GRID with

People also compare PWER with

Popular comparisons

GRID vs PWER — at a glance

Generated August 15, 2026.

Overview

GRID and PWER are both equity ETFs focused on energy transition and infrastructure themes, but they differ fundamentally in index methodology and asset scale. GRID tracks the Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index with $12.2B in assets and has operated since 2009, while PWER is the newer Nomura Energy Transition ETF launched in late 2023 with $12.6M in assets. The critical distinction: GRID emphasizes grid modernization and smart infrastructure, while PWER takes a broader energy transition approach—and GRID's vastly larger asset base suggests institutional adoption versus PWER's nascent stage.

How they differ

The biggest difference is scale and maturity. GRID holds $12.2B compared to PWER's $12.6M—a 970x gap—meaning GRID offers tighter spreads, better liquidity, and a longer operational track record (since 2009). GRID also carries a higher beta of 1.44 versus PWER's 1.0111, indicating GRID amplifies broad market moves more aggressively. On yield, GRID distributes 0.76% versus PWER's 0.54%, though GRID's 0.57% expense ratio is lower than PWER's 0.79%—a meaningful 22 basis point advantage that compounds over time. The underlying indexes diverge too: GRID's Nasdaq Clean Edge index focuses narrowly on smart grid infrastructure, while PWER's mandate spans the full energy transition landscape, likely giving PWER exposure to renewables, battery storage, and alternative energy beyond grid modernization.

Who each is best for

GRID: Fits investors seeking deep, established exposure to smart grid infrastructure with institutional-grade liquidity and a thematic tilt to electrification and utility modernization—those comfortable with above-market volatility (beta 1.44) in exchange for a specialized focus.

PWER: Designed for investors building a broader energy transition position who prioritize an all-in-one fund covering the full decarbonization chain, though tolerance for lower trading volume and newer fund operational history is needed.

Key risks to know

Concentration in thematic exposure. Both funds bet heavily on the energy transition narrative—a policy and adoption-dependent thesis. Delays in grid investment, EV adoption slowdowns, or shifts in energy policy could pressure both simultaneously despite their scale differences.

PWER's nascent stage and limited AUM. At $12.6M, PWER risks closure if assets don't grow, and its 14-month track record provides minimal insight into stress-period behavior or tax efficiency. New fund operational risk is material.

GRID's higher beta volatility. At 1.44 beta, GRID amplifies downturns and may lag broad equity returns in sideways or declining markets, making drawdowns sharper than the underlying energy transition fundamentals might suggest.

Index methodology opacity. GRID's Nasdaq Clean Edge index methodology and rebalancing frequency affect turnover and tax efficiency; PWER's broader mandate leaves exact holdings composition less transparent in the comparison.

Overlapping holdings risk. Both funds likely hold similar major infrastructure and renewable energy players—their correlation may be higher than stated betas suggest, so combining them adds limited diversification.

Bottom line

If you want an established, high-conviction smart grid play with lower fees and institutional liquidity, GRID's scale and operational history stand out; if you're building a diversified energy transition sleeve and can tolerate newer fund mechanics and lower trading volume, PWER's broader mandate fits. GRID's 970x asset advantage means tighter execution costs, but that scale also means it moves more with the market (1.44 beta). Past performance does not predict future results, and both funds' returns depend critically on energy transition policy tailwinds.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.

Learn the method

The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.

Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio

See how each ETF fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener