BILD vs. HAP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BILD (Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF) and HAP (VanEck Natural Resources ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. BILD is actively managed, while HAP is passively managed. Over the past year, BILD returned 14.53% vs 46.66% for HAP. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BILD charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for HAP.

Performance

BILD vs. HAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BILD achieves a 7.24% return, which is significantly lower than HAP's 21.49% return.

BILD

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: -2.00%
• YTD: 7.24%
• 6M: 6.70%
• 1Y: 14.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HAP

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 0.64%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 23.70%
• 1Y: 46.66%
• 3Y*: 18.93%
• 5Y*: 11.51%
• 10Y*: 11.99%

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

BILD vs. HAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BILD Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF	7.24%	21.08%	-2.68%	3.97%
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF	21.49%	34.91%	-4.08%	4.45%

Correlation

The correlation between BILD and HAP is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2023	0.54

The correlation between BILD and HAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

BILD vs. HAP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BILD	HAP
Utilities	54.2%	9.8%
Industrials	20.4%	10.2%
Energy	18.4%	32.3%
Real Estate	5.5%	0.4%
Communication Services	1.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	36.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.5%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	2.8%
Technology	-	0.9%

Return for Risk

BILD vs. HAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

BILD

BILD Risk / Return Rank: 40
BILD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
BILD Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
BILD Omega Ratio Rank: 37
BILD Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
BILD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

HAP

HAP Risk / Return Rank: 89
HAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
HAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
HAP Omega Ratio Rank: 88
HAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
HAP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

BILD vs. HAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD) and VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP). 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.

	BILD	HAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.35	3.14	-1.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	4.01	-2.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.56	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.41	5.65	-3.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.80	23.05	-16.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BILD vs. HAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BILD Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the HAP Sharpe Ratio of 3.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BILD and HAP, 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

	BILD	HAP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.35	3.14	-1.79
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.88	0.26	+0.62

Drawdowns

BILD vs. HAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BILD drawdown since its inception was -14.78%, smaller than the maximum HAP drawdown of -50.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BILD and HAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	BILD	HAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.78%	-50.73%	+35.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.05%	-8.31%	+2.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.92%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.66%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.05%	-1.95%	-3.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.70%	-12.03%	+8.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	2.03%	+0.11%

Volatility

BILD vs. HAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD) is 4.05%, while VanEck Natural Resources ETF (HAP) has a volatility of 4.37%. This indicates that BILD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BILD	HAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	4.37%	-0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.88%	12.24%	-3.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.78%	14.91%	-4.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.23%	18.24%	-5.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.23%	19.74%	-6.51%

BILD vs. HAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BILD has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than HAP's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

BILD vs. HAP - Dividend Comparison

BILD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, more than HAP's 1.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BILD Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF	2.86%	3.05%	5.53%	0.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HAP VanEck Natural Resources ETF	1.87%	2.27%	2.65%	3.27%	3.28%	2.16%	2.45%	2.80%	2.85%	2.02%	1.99%	3.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BILD and HAP in my portfolio?

BILD and HAP have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BILD or HAP?

HAP has higher volatility (4.37%) compared to BILD (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BILD dropped -14.78% vs HAP's -50.73%.

Which ETF is better, BILD or HAP?

On 1-year performance, HAP leads with 46.66% vs 14.53% for BILD. On fees, HAP is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, BILD has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BILD or HAP?

Over the 1-year period, HAP has performed better with a 46.66% return vs 14.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BILD or HAP?

HAP is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BILD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BILD or HAP?

BILD has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 1.87% for HAP.

What is the main difference between BILD and HAP?

They also come from different issuers: Macquarie and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for BILD and 0.42% for HAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.14 vs 1.35), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.