BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BGIE.TO (Brompton Global Infrastructure ETF) and CIF.TO (iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BGIE.TO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Brompton, while CIF.TO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Manulife Investment Management Global Infrastructure Index. BGIE.TO is actively managed, while CIF.TO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BGIE.TO returned 14.47%/yr vs 18.73%/yr for CIF.TO. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BGIE.TO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for CIF.TO.

Performance

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Brompton Global Infrastructure ETF (BGIE.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BGIE.TO achieves a 14.42% return, which is significantly lower than CIF.TO's 26.30% return.

BGIE.TO

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: -0.63%
• YTD: 14.42%
• 6M: 12.72%
• 1Y: 26.54%
• 3Y*: 23.10%
• 5Y*: 14.47%
• 10Y*: —

CIF.TO

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 0.11%
• YTD: 26.30%
• 6M: 16.95%
• 1Y: 37.93%
• 3Y*: 25.67%
• 5Y*: 18.73%
• 10Y*: 13.06%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BGIE.TO Brompton Global Infrastructure ETF	14.42%	21.56%	24.37%	5.45%	-2.37%	18.61%	10.30%
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF	26.30%	14.45%	25.40%	14.65%	5.90%	17.73%	23.25%

Correlation

The correlation between BGIE.TO and CIF.TO is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2020	0.43

Over the past year, BGIE.TO and CIF.TO have become more correlated (0.64) than their long-term average of 0.43, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BGIE.TO

BGIE.TO Risk / Return Rank: 58
BGIE.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
BGIE.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BGIE.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 53
BGIE.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
BGIE.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 62

CIF.TO

CIF.TO Risk / Return Rank: 78
CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CIF.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
CIF.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 79
CIF.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
CIF.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 77

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brompton Global Infrastructure ETF (BGIE.TO) and iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO). 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.

	BGIE.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.51	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	3.35	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.47	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	4.01	-0.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.04	14.50	-3.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BGIE.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the CIF.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BGIE.TO and CIF.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BGIE.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	2.51	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92	1.29	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	0.54	+0.44

Drawdowns

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BGIE.TO drawdown since its inception was -18.24%, smaller than the maximum CIF.TO drawdown of -42.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGIE.TO and CIF.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	BGIE.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.24%	-42.37%	+24.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.35%	-9.50%	+1.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.02%	-20.40%	+3.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.24%	-20.40%	+2.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.50%	0.00%	-2.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.45%	-5.66%	+1.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.42%	2.62%	-0.20%

Volatility

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Volatility Comparison

Brompton Global Infrastructure ETF (BGIE.TO) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF (CIF.TO) at 4.34%. This indicates that BGIE.TO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CIF.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BGIE.TO	CIF.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.62%	4.34%	+0.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.54%	12.46%	-0.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.73%	15.21%	-0.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.86%	14.56%	+1.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.27%	16.69%	-1.42%

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

BGIE.TO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CIF.TO's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

BGIE.TO vs. CIF.TO - Dividend Comparison

BGIE.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.86%, more than CIF.TO's 1.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BGIE.TO Brompton Global Infrastructure ETF	4.86%	4.95%	4.89%	5.19%	4.79%	4.10%	3.07%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CIF.TO iShares Global Infrastructure Index ETF	1.75%	2.05%	2.84%	2.36%	2.53%	2.24%	2.06%	1.83%	2.45%	2.27%	1.81%	2.41%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BGIE.TO and CIF.TO in my portfolio?

BGIE.TO and CIF.TO have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BGIE.TO or CIF.TO?

On fees, CIF.TO is cheaper at 0.72% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BGIE.TO or CIF.TO?

CIF.TO is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for BGIE.TO.

What is the main difference between BGIE.TO and CIF.TO?

BGIE.TO is categorized as Global Equities, while CIF.TO is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Brompton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BGIE.TO and 0.72% for CIF.TO.