EINC vs. PIPE

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EINC (VanEck Energy Income ETF) and PIPE (Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. EINC is passively managed, while PIPE is actively managed. Over the past year, EINC returned 33.52% vs 35.38% for PIPE. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. EINC charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PIPE.

Performance

EINC vs. PIPE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) and Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with EINC having a 29.71% return and PIPE slightly higher at 30.99%.

EINC

• 1D: 1.39%
• 1M: 5.79%
• 6M: 28.55%
• YTD: 29.71%
• 1Y: 33.52%
• 3Y*: 29.16%
• 5Y*: 23.13%
• 10Y*: 11.78%

PIPE

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: 5.61%
• 6M: 29.27%
• YTD: 30.99%
• 1Y: 35.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EINC vs. PIPE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	29.71%	1.83%
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	30.99%	0.14%

Correlation

The correlation between EINC and PIPE is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.96

The correlation between EINC and PIPE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

EINC vs. PIPE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EINC	PIPE
Energy	99.4%	88.7%
Industrials	0.6%	-
Utilities	0.6%	1.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.3%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

EINC vs. PIPE — Risk / Return Rank

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

EINC

EINC Risk / Return Rank: 82
EINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
EINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
EINC Omega Ratio Rank: 81
EINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
EINC Martin Ratio Rank: 72

PIPE

PIPE Risk / Return Rank: 87
PIPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
PIPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
PIPE Omega Ratio Rank: 85
PIPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
PIPE Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

EINC vs. PIPE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) and Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE). 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.

	EINC	PIPE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	2.39	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	3.23	-0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.41	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.27	4.85	-0.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.48	11.69	-1.22

EINC vs. PIPE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EINC Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the PIPE Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EINC and PIPE, 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

EINC vs. PIPE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EINC drawdown since its inception was -87.55%, which is greater than PIPE's maximum drawdown of -15.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EINC and PIPE.

Drawdown Indicators

	EINC	PIPE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-87.55%	-15.69%	-71.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.89%	-7.33%	-0.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.01%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.87%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-68.85%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.67%	-1.32%	-0.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.97%	-4.00%	-39.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.21%	3.03%	+0.18%

Volatility

EINC vs. PIPE - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) and Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) have volatilities of 5.40% and 5.48%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EINC	PIPE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.40%	5.48%	-0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.38%	11.69%	+0.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.45%	14.88%	+0.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.58%	18.68%	+0.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.33%	18.68%	+6.65%

EINC vs. PIPE - Expense Ratio Comparison

EINC has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than PIPE's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

EINC vs. PIPE - Dividend Comparison

EINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.41%, less than PIPE's 3.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	3.41%	4.51%	3.33%	3.77%	2.89%	6.03%	6.69%	9.66%	11.31%	8.53%	9.71%	28.53%
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	3.63%	3.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EINC and PIPE in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, EINC and PIPE move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EINC or PIPE?

PIPE has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to EINC (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EINC dropped -87.55% vs PIPE's -15.69%.

Which ETF is better, EINC or PIPE?

On 1-year performance, PIPE leads with 35.38% vs 33.52% for EINC. On fees, EINC is cheaper at 0.45% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EINC or PIPE?

Over the 1-year period, PIPE has performed better with a 35.38% return vs 33.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EINC or PIPE?

EINC is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIPE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EINC or PIPE?

PIPE has the higher dividend yield at 3.63%, compared with 3.41% for EINC.

What is the main difference between EINC and PIPE?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for EINC and 0.75% for PIPE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIPE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 2.18), 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.