1. iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (NASDAQ:ICLN)

Total assets under management: US$2 billion
Expense ratio: 0.39 percent

The iShares Global Clean Energy ETF was created on June 24, 2008, and has a large portfolio of domestic and international stocks. An analyst report on the ETF states that it ‘likely doesn’t deserve’ a large weighting in an investor’s long-term portfolio. It suggests that the fund could instead be useful as a satellite holding that looks at a fraction of the market that is often overlooked by less focused ETFs.

The iShares Global Clean Energy ETF has 103 holdings. Three of its top-weighted holdings are Bloom Energy (NYSE:BE), First Solar (NASDAQ:FSLR) and Sunrun (NASDAQ:RUN). In terms of performance, this ETF has a one year return rate of 59.37 percent.

2. Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (ARCA:PBW)

Total assets under management: US$761.07 million
Expense ratio: 0.64 percent

Launched on March 3, 2005, the Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF focuses on clean energy companies using green and renewable energy, and technologies that help with cleaner energy. Its holdings also include mineral companies focused on critical metals necessary for clean energy.

Currently, of the 64 stocks it holds, this ETF’s top-weighted holdings include Bloom Energy, Lifezone Metals (NYSE:LZM), and Lithium Argentina (TSX:LAR). Its one year return rate comes in at 69.48 percent.

3. First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy (NASDAQ:QCLN)

Total assets under management: US$572.57 million
Expense ratio: 0.56 percent

The First Trust NASDAQ Clean Edge Green Energy Index Fund, which came into existence on February 14, 2007, is a unique member of the alternative energy category, according to ETFdb.com. Why? Because it offers broad exposure by also investing in companies across a wide range of green energy subsectors, including biofuels, solar energy and advanced batteries.

Three of its 50 holdings with the highest weights are Bloom Energy, ON Semiconductor (NASDAQ:ON) and Rivian Automotive (NASDAQ:RIVN). The one year return rate for this ETF is 43.45 percent.

4. State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF (ARCA:CNRG)

Total assets under management: US$195.57 million
Expense ratio: 0.45 percent

The SPDR S&P Kensho Clean Power ETF was launched in October 2018 and tracks companies whose products and services are driving innovation in the clean energy sector, including the areas of solar, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric power. It has 44 holdings.

Three of the fund’s top holdings include Bloom Energy, SolarEdge Technologies (NASDAQ:SEDG), and Ormat Technologies (NYSE:ORA). Its one year return performance stands at 55.67 percent.

5. ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ARCA:ACES)

Total assets under management: US$112.07 million
Expense ratio: 0.55 percent

The ALPS Clean Energy ETF was formed fairly recently, on June 29, 2018. The fund tracks the CIBC Atlas Clean Energy Index, providing exposure to a diverse set of US and Canadian companies involved in the clean energy sector, including renewables and clean technology.

This ALPS ETF has 39 holdings, and some of its top holdings are Albemarle (NYSE:ALB), Ormat Technologies and Sunrun. It has a one year return of 31.92 percent.

Medical device ETFs to consider

Investors keen on medical device ETFs only have three choices, according to ETFdb.com. Other life science ETFs can include medical device stocks in their holdings but cover a broad range of firms, while these three funds offer sector-specific exposure.

Here’s a brief look at the three medical device ETFs available to investors on US exchanges.

1. iShares US Medical Devices ETF (ARCA:IHI)

Total assets under management: US$4.24 billion

The iShares US Medical Devices ETF was launched in 2006 and tracked 50 holdings as of January 8, 2026. IHI has an expense ratio of 0.38 percent.

The majority of its portfolio is made up of large-cap US stocks. Its top three holdings, which combine for over 45 percent of its holdings, are:

2. SPDR S&P Health Care Equipment ETF (ARCA:XHE)

Total assets under management: US$161.1 million

Formed on January 26, 2011, the SPDR S&P Health Care Equipment ETF tracks 67 holdings as of January 8, 2026. This SPDR ETF has an expense ratio of 0.35 percent.

XHE offers exposure to medical device companies of all sizes, with 30 percent of its holdings being large-cap, 28 percent mid-cap, 37 percent small-cap and about 5 percent being micro stocks. The majority are US-based.

Its 67 holdings are relatively equally weighted, and its top holdings include UFP Technologies (NASDAQ:UFPT), Lantheus Holdings (NASDAQ:LNTH) and QuidelOrtho (NASDAQ:QDEL).

3. First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF (BATS:MDEV)

Total assets under management: US$2.2 million

The First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF launched on June 22, 2021, and aims to replicate the performance of the Indxx Medical Devices Index. MDEV has an expense ratio of percent.

This medical device ETF holds a portfolio of global life science stocks, with significant exposure to North America, European and Asian companies. Its 51 holdings are predominantly large-cap companies at 70 percent, with the remaining 30 percent being mid-cap firms.

The First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF’s top holdings include Exact Sciences (NASDAQ:EXAS), Globus Medical (NYSE:GMED) and Intuitive Surgical (NASDAQ:ISRG).

Target rate probabilities for January Fed meeting.

Chart via CME Group.

Trump has frequently criticized Powell for not lowering rates quickly enough, and Powell’s replacement, who has not yet been announced, is widely expected to be more in line with Trump’s views.

“We see increased interference with the Fed as a key bullish wildcard for the precious metals in 2026,” Carsten Menke, head of next-generation research at Julius Baer Group, told Bloomberg. He noted that because silver is a smaller market than gold, it typically reacts “more strongly to such concerns.”

Silver price chart, January 6 to 14, 2026.

Silver and its sister metal gold tend to fare better when rates are lower, meaning rate cut expectations coupled with the investigation of Powell and the Fed have helped to stoke prices for the precious metals.

While silver is known for lagging behind gold before outperforming, it’s now ahead in terms of percentage gains — silver is up about nearly 200 percent year-over-year, while gold has risen around 72 percent.

The yellow metal also hit a new all-time high on Wednesday, peaking at US$4,641.40 per ounce.

In addition to rate-related factors, silver’s breakout this year has been driven by various other elements.

As a precious metal, it’s influenced by many of the same factors as gold, but its October price jump, which took it past the US$50 level, was also driven by a lack of liquidity in the London market.

While that issue appears to have resolved, silver remains in a multi-year supply deficit. Tariff concerns and silver’s new status as a critical mineral in the US have also provided support.

In addition to its appeal as a precious metal, silver’s industrial side shouldn’t be forgotten — according to the Silver Institute, the white metal’s ‘global silver industrial demand is poised to grow further as demand from vital technology sectors accelerates over the next five years. Sectors such as solar energy, automotive electric vehicles and their infrastructure, and data centers and artificial intelligence will drive industrial demand higher through 2030.’

Meeting demand through supply

‘Primary production—mining—remains the irreplaceable foundation of copper supply,’ said Global Head of Critical Minerals and Energy Transition Consulting at S&P Global Energy Eleonor Kramarz.

‘Bridging the impending supply gap depends not only on geology, engineering, and logistics and investment, but also on governance and policies. That translates into timeliness in permitting and consultation, a time clock on litigation and stability in governance and regulation. The alternative is uncertainty, and uncertainty comes at a hefty cost.’

The report added that output from existing mines will keep declining without significant new investment.

Recycling is regarded as the “secondary supply,” but however provides at best only about a third of the total supply by 2040.

Processing also remains critical in this scenario. Smelting and refining capacity is still concentrated in China, accounting for about 40 to 50 percent total capacity or 12 of the 29 million metric tons to be specific.

“(This) geographic concentration amplifies systemic risks and exposes the supply chain to geopolitical shocks.”

“While recycling could possibly meet up to a quarter of total demand by 2040, it cannot close the gap – primary mined supply remains essential,” the report concluded.

Copper and electrification

S&P Global wrote that copper also plays a huge role in meeting the growing requirements of electrification and technologies such as AI and data centers.

It noted that while AI is not creating the largest of copper demand, its requirements highlight the need for expanded electricity supply.

Still, there is a need to hold space for how AI will affect the generation of industrial, commercial, creative and even personal applications that require more electricity.

For data centers, the electricity demand in the US could rise from the current 5 percent to 14 percent by 2030.

“Data centers are electricity-intensive, and their proliferation is driving massive investments in both direct copper use (for power delivery, cooling, and IT infrastructure) and in the electric grid infrastructure that supports them.”

The report illustrated that to meet the global power demand of 2040, the world will need to build the equivalent of roughly 330 Hoover Dams, or over 650 one-gigawatt nuclear reactors each year between now and then.

“Copper is the material enabling this massive growth in power demand – unlocking the age of AI and the electrified future of which it is characteristic.”

A report by Benchmark on annual EV sales revealed that 20.7 million units were sold in 2025, but that the same growth rate of 20 percent “is not expected” to be the same in 2026.

Noting, “manufacturers (will) focus their efforts on the deadline year, 2027.’

In terms of overall demand for copper and how it relates to EVs, S&P Global said that demand for ICE vehicles declines due to the growing share of EVs.

“Construction and machinery continue to be the largest contributors to core economic demand.”

Australia’s copper developments

As a nation, Australia is making moves that relate to copper in terms of demand and investment.

Its Critical Minerals Strategy and Resource Industry Growth Initiative, along with its partnership with Japan, prioritize joint investment and regulatory simplification.

Using public finance bodies such as the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) and JOGMEC, Japan is backing Australian projects to secure long-term access to critical minerals, including copper.

Firms such as Lynas Rare Earths (ASX:LYC,OTCQX:LYSDY) and their projects also play a role, assisting in securing stable supplies of rare earths, lithium and copper.

In 2024 and 2025, cooperation under the Japan–Australia Critical Minerals Partnership expanded further, with new processing and infrastructure initiatives announced in Western Australia.

Large-scale infrastructure projects are also adding to future copper demand. One high-profile example is the proposed AAPowerLink subsea cable project, which would connect Australia to Singapore and Indonesia.

If developed as planned, the project could consume tens of thousands of tonnes of copper, highlighting how Australia’s export-focused energy and infrastructure strategy is translating into material demand growth.

Together, these developments underscore how government-backed partnerships and major infrastructure investments are reinforcing Australia’s role as a reliable copper supplier, while creating longer-term opportunities for investors across the copper value chain.

Addressing the basics

The demand for copper arises from the fact that it is essential for the generation, transmission and use of electricity.

The irony is that the metal which enables electrification is having a hard time catching up to the accelerating pace of electrification itself.

While S&P Global did not have policy recommendations, it implied that current policies may be slowing things down.

“Average copper mine takes 17 years from discovery to production, with much time spent on permitting, environmental reviews and community consultations.”

It cited that changing government terms, tariffs and regulatory frameworks are bringing uncertainty to the resource sector, slowing investment and project development.

The report also noted that while mining is the primary driver of supply, it is only a part of the picture. It’s also about what happens to copper when it leaves mines.

The conclusion is that the requirement is for multilateral cooperation and increased regional diversification.

“The future is not just copper-intensive, it is copper-enabled,” S&P Global concluded.

“As electrification and digital intelligence become defining characteristics of global development, copper is indeed an ever-more critical mineral, carrying the electric currents that are connecting, conducting, and catalyzing innovation and economic advance.”