CLMB vs. IGF
CLMB (Climb Global Solutions) is a stock, while IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) is Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net). Over the past 10 years, CLMB returned 20.18%/yr vs 8.79%/yr for IGF. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
CLMB vs. IGF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLMB achieves a -14.27% return, which is significantly lower than IGF's 9.67% return. Over the past 10 years, CLMB has outperformed IGF with an annualized return of 20.18%, while IGF has yielded a comparatively lower 8.79% annualized return.
CLMB
- 1D
- 3.19%
- 1M
- 5.10%
- YTD
- -14.27%
- 6M
- -18.45%
- 1Y
- -12.14%
- 3Y*
- 24.21%
- 5Y*
- 30.57%
- 10Y*
- 20.18%
IGF
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -0.16%
- YTD
- 9.67%
- 6M
- 8.98%
- 1Y
- 17.62%
- 3Y*
- 16.78%
- 5Y*
- 10.70%
- 10Y*
- 8.79%
CLMB vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLMB Climb Global Solutions | -14.27% | -18.40% | 133.60% | 76.59% | -8.29% | 88.47% | 22.14% | 70.90% | -37.08% | -7.01% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 9.67% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 6.14% | -1.26% | 11.57% | -6.50% | 25.82% | -9.95% | 19.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLMB and IGF is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2007 | 0.17 |
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
CLMB vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank
CLMB
IGF
CLMB vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Climb Global Solutions (CLMB) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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.
| CLMB | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.30 | -0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.23 | 3.02 | -3.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.45 | 8.52 | -8.98 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CLMB vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLMB drawdown since its inception was -89.12%, which is greater than IGF's maximum drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLMB and IGF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLMB | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.12% | -58.33% | -30.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -53.40% | -5.87% | -47.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -53.40% | -14.28% | -39.12% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.40% | -20.83% | -32.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -53.40% | -42.11% | -11.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -38.45% | -2.99% | -35.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.24% | -11.84% | -20.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 26.80% | 2.07% | +24.73% |
Volatility
CLMB vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison
Climb Global Solutions (CLMB) has a higher volatility of 13.29% compared to iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) at 3.35%. This indicates that CLMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLMB | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.29% | 3.35% | +9.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 41.36% | 8.73% | +32.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 52.51% | 10.56% | +41.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.87% | 13.96% | +31.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 40.99% | 16.73% | +24.26% |
Dividends
CLMB vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison
CLMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than IGF's 2.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLMB Climb Global Solutions | 0.39% | 0.66% | 0.67% | 1.24% | 2.16% | 1.94% | 3.56% | 4.20% | 6.80% | 4.07% | 3.64% | 3.71% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.91% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLMB and IGF have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CLMB has higher volatility (13.29%) compared to IGF (3.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLMB dropped -89.12% vs IGF's -58.33%.
IGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs -0.23), 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.
Find the right allocation for CLMB and IGF
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