BBHL vs. ENFR
BBHL (BBH Select Large Cap ETF) and ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BBHL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Actively Managed, while ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.21, they often move in opposite directions. BBHL charges 0.71%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ENFR.
Performance
BBHL vs. ENFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BBHL achieves a 5.64% return, which is significantly lower than ENFR's 23.07% return.
BBHL
- 1D
- -0.76%
- 1M
- 1.07%
- YTD
- 5.64%
- 6M
- 5.58%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ENFR
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- -5.94%
- YTD
- 23.07%
- 6M
- 24.76%
- 1Y
- 24.84%
- 3Y*
- 28.26%
- 5Y*
- 19.69%
- 10Y*
- 11.81%
BBHL vs. ENFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BBHL BBH Select Large Cap ETF | 5.64% | 1.70% |
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 23.07% | 0.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between BBHL and ENFR is -0.21, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2025 | -0.21 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BBHL vs. ENFR — Risk / Return Rank
BBHL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ENFR
BBHL vs. ENFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BBH Select Large Cap ETF (BBHL) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| BBHL | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.29 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.89 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.40 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BBHL vs. ENFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BBHL drawdown since its inception was -11.99%, smaller than the maximum ENFR drawdown of -68.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBHL and ENFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BBHL | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.99% | -68.28% | +56.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -62.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.31% | -6.12% | +4.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.88% | -15.94% | +13.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.36% | — |
Volatility
BBHL vs. ENFR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BBHL | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.42% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.57% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.12% | 14.82% | -1.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.12% | 19.24% | -6.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.12% | 24.68% | -11.56% |
BBHL vs. ENFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
BBHL has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is higher than ENFR's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
BBHL vs. ENFR - Dividend Comparison
BBHL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ENFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.08%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BBHL BBH Select Large Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 4.08% | 4.77% | 4.41% | 5.48% | 5.23% | 7.86% | 7.57% | 5.81% | 3.98% | 2.98% | 3.31% | 3.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BBHL and ENFR have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for BBHL.
ENFR has the higher dividend yield at 4.08%, compared with 0.00% for BBHL.
BBHL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while ENFR is Energy Equities. BBHL tracks Actively Managed, while ENFR tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. They also come from different issuers: BBH and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for BBHL and 0.35% for ENFR.
Find the right allocation for BBHL and ENFR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer