Small Energy: Leaner, Cleaner and Greener (PBD, PUW, NLR)
13 November 2007 at 12:59 pm by Gary Gordon
With oil in the $90s, many investors are asking me to talk about alternative energy. Sometimes, people request that I write about wind, solar or "electric" opportunities. Others just ask for a recommendation on the biggest, baddest, "greenest" corporation on the NYSE or NASDAQ.
Yet the largest companies are not "largely" responsible for the future of energy resources. It is the smaller and mid-sized companies that are actually forging new ground in cleaner exploration and greener choices. What’s more, many of the brightest bulbs are headquartered in foreign countries.
For example, the PowerShares Global Clean Energy Fund (PBD) is made up of small- and mid-sized growth-oriented corporations. Each focuses on renewable sources of energy and/or technologies that will facilitate cleaner energy.
The PowerShares Global Clean Energy Fund (PBD) may be limited to clean and green, but it is not geographically constrained. It is diversified clear across the globe.
Granted, a P/E of 40+ may make you wince at first glance. That said, the return on equity is a respectable 13.5% and there isn’t a better alternative for "alt energy" on the global ETF plane.
Whereas the PowerShares Global Clean Energy Fund (PBD) is all about cleaner and greener, there’s one exchange-traded fund that’s dedicated to the improvement/enhancement of existing energy technologies. The WilderHill Progressive Energy Fund (PUW) tracks a group of companies that work towards transitional solutions; that is, these are companies working towards "leanness" and greater efficiency in the use of fossil fuels.

The WilderHill Progressive Energy Fund (PUW) is a mixture of long-standing companies and newbies to the field. Still, as much as 80% of the allocation is to small- and mid-cap listings.
And while I didn’t mention it in the title, one source of energy still has a future… both in the United States and around the world; specifically, nuclear energy still accounts for 20% of U.S. electricity, while other countries seek new plants for their own purposes.
Granted, nuclear energy tends to conjure up images of Chernobyl and/or even 3 Mile Island. Yet the taboo topic hasn’t prevented old and new corporations from increasing their exposure.
In fact, there are quite a few profitable companies in uranium mining and plant infrastructure. The Market Vectors Global Nuclear Energy Fund (NLR) is weighted equally across large, medium and small sized participants. Moreover, the exchange-traded fund has garnered a great deal of interest out of the gate.
Disclosure Statement: ETF Expert is a web log ("blog") that makes the world of ETFs easier to understand. Pacific Park Financial, Inc., a Registered Investment Advisor with the SEC, may hold positions in the ETFs, mutual funds and/or index funds mentioned above. Investors who are interested in money management services may visit the Pacific Park Financial, Inc. web site.




















No one alternate energy is going to make up quickly for ours years of failing to address the issue of energy needs and pollution needs.
From an investment standpoint, I'm wondering if it is best to pick the best in class and invest in that stock rather than an ETF, The ETF minimizes the risk, but it also denies the opportunity of cashing in on the company that had the wining idea. Maybe that decision is industry specific. For example, its nor clear which solar company is going to make the jump to commercial scale production. Maybe this is a case for investing in an ETF?
I like Vestas for large scale wind, but its price is a bit too high for my portfolio. Is it better to go with an ETF that includes Vestas?
Any other view points out there?