GRID
Safe
High confidence
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.
Updated November 6, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- GRIDInvestors who want targeted infrastructure exposure and accept its concentration.
- PWERInvestors who want targeted energy exposure and accept its concentration.
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
PWER
Generally safe
Limited data
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| 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 | $154.21 as of November 6, 2026 | $42.16 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | 0.92% | 2.14% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 1.00% | 1.16% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | 83 | 74 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | 0.76% | 1.58% |
| Expense ratio | 0.56% | 0.79% |
| AUM | $11.3B | $12.1M |
| 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 | 1.42 | 1.0111 |
| Last dividend | $0.353 | $0.226 |
| Ex-dividend date | 09/24/2026 | 09/21/2026 |
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
GRID has lagged PWER over the trailing twelve months, posting a -2.44% total return against 28.38%. Measured from Nov 2023 — the start of shared available history — PWER has compounded at 20.37% a year versus 18.06% for GRID. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | Since Nov 2023 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRID | 0.00% | -2.44% | 18.06% | 26.0% | -0.25 | -0.33 | -23.5% |
| PWER | 20.31% | 28.38% | 20.37% | 22.2% | 0.95 | 1.31 | -13.7% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 5, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Nov 2023” measures every fund from November 29, 2023 — the start of shared available history — 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.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineChoose GRID if you want targeted infrastructure exposure and accept its concentration. Choose PWER if you want targeted energy exposure and accept its concentration.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs329
Total AUM$290B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
First Trust is known for offering a diverse lineup of actively and passively managed ETFs across multiple investment styles and asset classes. Their fund families span income-focused strategies including dividend and covered call approaches, as well as thematic, factor-based, alternatives, and sector-specific offerings that appeal to different investor objectives. The issuer provides breadth across allocation, bond, buffer, commodities, and municipal fund categories, making them a comprehensive provider serving various portfolio construction and income-generation needs.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on GRID.
ETFs8
Total AUM$747M
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.
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.
PWER has paid the higher yield over the past 12 months, 1.16% vs 1.00% for GRID. We compare trailing 12-month yields here because PWER's latest distribution annualizes to 2.14% against 1.16% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income.
GRID is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.56% compared to 0.79%.
GRID is the larger fund by assets ($11.3B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Who should choose each?
Choose GRID
First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund
- Want targeted infrastructure exposure and accept the concentration that comes with it.
- Want to keep costs low — a 0.56% expense ratio vs 0.79% for PWER.
Choose PWER
Nomura Energy Transition ETF
- Want targeted energy exposure and accept the concentration that comes with it.
- Prefer lower market sensitivity — a beta of 1.01 vs 1.42 for GRID.
Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
1 shared position
GRID 8.7% of its top-10 weight
PWER 3.5% of its top-10 weight
| Position | GRID | PWER |
|---|---|---|
| PWR Quanta Services Inc |
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at the rates paid over the past 12 months, GRID would pay about $100.00 a year (about $25.00 per quarterly distribution on average), while PWER would pay about $116.00 a year (about $29.00 per quarterly distribution on average). Both pay quarterly distributions.
GRID 12-month yield1.00%
PWER 12-month yield1.16%
Annual cash diff on $10K$16.00
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, GRID would cost approximately $560 in fees vs $790 for PWER (simplified, not compounded). The $230.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
GRID ER0.56%
PWER ER0.79%
Strategy & risk
GRID tracks Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index with an electrification approach. PWER is an ETF whose tracked index or strategy detail is not recorded in our data, so this comparison rests on the measured figures — yield, fees, size, and performance — rather than strategy labels. Beta is 1.42 for GRID and 1.0111 for PWER, making PWER the less sensitive to market moves of the two by this measure.
GRID beta1.42
PWER beta1.0111
Fund details
GRID is managed by First Trust (launched 11/16/2009) with $11.3B in assets. PWER is managed by Nomura (launched 11/28/2023) with $12.1M in assets.
GRID AUM$11.3B
PWER AUM$12.1M
Frequently asked questions
What is the current distribution rate for GRID and PWER?
Over the past 12 months GRID paid 1.00% and PWER 1.16%, based on fund data updated November 2026. We compare trailing 12-month yields here because PWER's latest distribution annualizes to 2.14% against 1.16% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income. Yields move with both the payouts 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. PWER has paid the higher trailing 12-month yield (1.16% vs 1.00%). We compare trailing 12-month yields here because PWER's latest distribution annualizes to 2.14% against 1.16% actually paid over the past 12 months, so annualizing a single payment would misstate its income. 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. PWER (Nomura Energy Transition ETF) is an ETF whose tracked index or strategy detail is not recorded in our data, so this comparison rests on the measured figures — yield, fees, size, and performance — rather than strategy labels. They are issued by First Trust and Nomura respectively.
Can I hold both GRID and PWER?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 1 position, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
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 — GRID scores 83, PWER scores 74, so GRID's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. PWER has also been less sensitive to market moves (beta 1.01 vs 1.42 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 0.56% 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 the rates paid over the past 12 months, $10,000 in GRID would pay about $100.00 a year (about $25.00 per quarterly distribution on average). $10,000 in PWER would pay about $116.00 a year (about $29.00 per quarterly distribution on average).
Which has performed better historically, GRID or PWER?
GRID has lagged PWER over the trailing twelve months, posting a -2.44% total return against 28.38%. Measured from Nov 2023 — the start of shared available history — PWER has compounded at 20.37% a year versus 18.06% for GRID. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare GRID with
People also compare PWER with
Popular comparisons
GRID vs PWER — at a glance
Generated October 31, 2026.
Figures quoted in this analysis are from its generation date and may lag the live snapshot table above, which always shows the latest data.
Overview
GRID and PWER are both equity ETFs pursuing energy and infrastructure transition themes, but through different index mandates and time horizons. GRID tracks the Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index and focuses on grid modernization and electrification within utilities and industrials; it has 16 years years of track record and $11.3B in assets. PWER tracks a broader energy transition strategy under Nomura's mandate and is substantially newer, having launched 11/28/2023. The funds differ primarily in scope (grid-specific versus broader energy transition), scale, and yield.
How they differ
GRID's foundation is the Nasdaq Clean Edge Smart Grid Infrastructure Index, which isolates companies involved in grid upgrades and smart energy systems—a narrower thesis than PWER's energy transition focus. This structural difference shows in their AUM: GRID holds $11.3B compared to PWER's $12.1M, a vast gap that reflects both GRID's longer history and market preference for its index approach.
Yield and expense structure diverge sharply. PWER distributes at 2.14%, more than double GRID's 0.92%, while charging 0.79% in expenses versus GRID's 0.56%. PWER's higher payout may reflect either a higher-yield portfolio or a younger fund still establishing asset base; at $12.1M in AUM, PWER's distribution rate warrants scrutiny for sustainability.
Market sensitivity also differs. PWER's beta of 1.0111 is nearly neutral to market moves, suggesting its energy transition holdings behave more independently of general equity swings—or may reflect a shorter return history from which beta is estimated.
Who each is best for
GRID: Investors seeking established, index-tracked exposure to grid infrastructure and smart-energy themes, with a lower current income need and comfort with above-market equity volatility. The fund's long track record and substantial asset base appeal to buy-and-hold allocators.
PWER: Investors interested in a broader energy transition portfolio who are willing to accept early-stage fund risk and higher distribution rates, and who want lower correlation to general market swings. The fund is suitable for those evaluating emerging transition strategies without requiring a lengthy performance history.
Key risks to know
- Smart grid concentration and regulatory timing. GRID's focus on grid modernization and electrification depends on government infrastructure policy and utility capital spending cycles. Shifts in regulatory support or delayed infrastructure rollouts could weigh on holdings.
- PWER's early-stage size and distribution sustainability. At $12.1M in AUM, PWER carries the risk that its 2.14% distribution rate may not be sustainable as the fund grows or if underlying holdings weaken. Tracking record is too short to establish a long-term payout pattern.
- Overlapping energy transition exposure. Both funds pursue clean energy and electrification themes, so their holdings may overlap significantly. Holding both would not provide meaningful diversification from each other and may concentrate portfolio risk in the same companies.
- GRID's above-market volatility. With a beta of 1.42, GRID amplifies general market declines and gains more sharply than the broader market, making it a tactical rather than defensive holding in a transition-focused sleeve.
Bottom line
If you want an established, low-expense indexed approach to grid infrastructure with acceptable distribution income, GRID's $11.3B in assets and 16 years-year history offer a stable foundation. If you're drawn to a newer, broader energy transition strategy and accept the risk of a $12.1M fund with higher payouts, PWER may suit an exploratory allocation—but verify that the 2.14% rate aligns with your expectations for a fund launched only recently. Past performance does not predict future results; both funds' energy transition themes carry regulatory and policy risk unrelated to market returns.
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.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.