EFRA vs. BILD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EFRA (iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF) and BILD (Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EFRA is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the FTSE Green Revenues Select Infrastructure and Industrials Index, while BILD is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Macquarie. EFRA is passively managed, while BILD is actively managed. Over the past year, EFRA returned 10.45% vs 16.09% for BILD. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EFRA charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for BILD.

Performance

EFRA vs. BILD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFRA achieves a 5.65% return, which is significantly lower than BILD's 7.62% return.

EFRA

• 1D: -1.00%
• 1M: 1.30%
• YTD: 5.65%
• 6M: 4.75%
• 1Y: 10.45%
• 3Y*: 11.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BILD

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -1.90%
• YTD: 7.62%
• 6M: 7.81%
• 1Y: 16.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EFRA vs. BILD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EFRA iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF	5.65%	13.76%	8.09%	7.39%
BILD Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF	7.62%	21.08%	-2.68%	3.73%

Correlation

The correlation between EFRA and BILD is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 29, 2023	0.63

The correlation between EFRA and BILD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFRA vs. BILD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EFRA	BILD
Industrials	64.1%	22.1%
Utilities	24.2%	52.8%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	-
Technology	2.8%	-
Basic Materials	2.5%	-
Communication Services	-	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	18.2%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	5.4%

Return for Risk

EFRA vs. BILD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFRA

EFRA Risk / Return Rank: 21
EFRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
EFRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
EFRA Omega Ratio Rank: 19
EFRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
EFRA Martin Ratio Rank: 22

BILD

BILD Risk / Return Rank: 47
BILD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
BILD Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
BILD Omega Ratio Rank: 45
BILD Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
BILD Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

EFRA vs. BILD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF (EFRA) and Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD). 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.

	EFRA	BILD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.72	1.49	-0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.11	2.02	-0.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.27	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.94	2.67	-1.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.51	6.81	-4.30

EFRA vs. BILD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFRA Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the BILD Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFRA and BILD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EFRA vs. BILD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFRA drawdown since its inception was -16.25%, which is greater than BILD's maximum drawdown of -14.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFRA and BILD.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFRA	BILD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.25%	-14.78%	-1.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.20%	-6.05%	-5.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.25%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.38%	-4.71%	-1.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.67%	-3.72%	+0.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.17%	2.37%	+1.80%

Volatility

EFRA vs. BILD - Volatility Comparison

iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF (EFRA) has a higher volatility of 4.96% compared to Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD) at 2.98%. This indicates that EFRA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BILD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFRA	BILD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.96%	2.98%	+1.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.79%	8.88%	+2.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.59%	10.86%	+3.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.58%	13.15%	+2.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.58%	13.15%	+2.43%

EFRA vs. BILD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFRA has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than BILD's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFRA vs. BILD - Dividend Comparison

EFRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.17%, less than BILD's 5.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BILD Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF	5.81%	3.05%	5.53%	0.52%	0.00%
EFRA iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF	4.17%	4.34%	3.79%	1.85%	0.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFRA and BILD in my portfolio?

EFRA and BILD have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFRA or BILD?

EFRA has higher volatility (4.96%) compared to BILD (2.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFRA dropped -16.25% vs BILD's -14.78%.

Which ETF is better, EFRA or BILD?

On 1-year performance, BILD leads with 16.09% vs 10.45% for EFRA. On fees, EFRA is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, BILD has been the lower-risk option at 2.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFRA or BILD?

Over the 1-year period, BILD has performed better with a 16.09% return vs 10.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFRA or BILD?

EFRA is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BILD.

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

BILD has the higher dividend yield at 5.81%, compared with 4.17% for EFRA.

What is the main difference between EFRA and BILD?

EFRA is categorized as Industrials Equities, while BILD is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Macquarie. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for EFRA and 0.49% for BILD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BILD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.72), 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.