EIPX vs. FTWO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EIPX (FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF) and FTWO (Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. EIPX is actively managed, while FTWO is passively managed. Over the past year, EIPX returned 30.04% vs 30.91% for FTWO. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EIPX charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FTWO.

Performance

EIPX vs. FTWO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX) and Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EIPX achieves a 21.96% return, which is significantly higher than FTWO's 10.90% return.

EIPX

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: -2.12%
• YTD: 21.96%
• 6M: 19.46%
• 1Y: 30.04%
• 3Y*: 21.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FTWO

• 1D: -0.94%
• 1M: -1.13%
• YTD: 10.90%
• 6M: 13.58%
• 1Y: 30.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EIPX vs. FTWO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	21.96%	11.44%	19.11%	2.04%
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF	10.90%	43.06%	14.97%	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between EIPX and FTWO is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 1, 2023	0.61

Over the past year, the correlation between EIPX and FTWO has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.61, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

EIPX vs. FTWO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EIPX	FTWO
Energy	69.5%	29.1%
Utilities	26.1%	11.7%
Industrials	4.2%	32.2%
Technology	0.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	25.9%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	1.2%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EIPX vs. FTWO — Risk / Return Rank

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

EIPX

EIPX Risk / Return Rank: 86
EIPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
EIPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
EIPX Omega Ratio Rank: 77
EIPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EIPX Martin Ratio Rank: 89

FTWO

FTWO Risk / Return Rank: 49
FTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
FTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 46
FTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FTWO 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.

EIPX vs. FTWO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX) and Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO). 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.

	EIPX	FTWO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	1.72	+0.99
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.82	2.33	+1.49
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.29	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.32	2.69	+4.63
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.31	7.23	+13.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EIPX vs. FTWO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EIPX Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is higher than the FTWO Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EIPX and FTWO, 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

	EIPX	FTWO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.71	1.72	+0.99
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.20	1.31	-0.11

Drawdowns

EIPX vs. FTWO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EIPX drawdown since its inception was -15.43%, smaller than the maximum FTWO drawdown of -18.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EIPX and FTWO.

Drawdown Indicators

	EIPX	FTWO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.43%	-18.17%	+2.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.12%	-11.54%	+7.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.43%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.58%	-9.19%	+6.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.27%	-3.43%	+1.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.49%	4.29%	-2.80%

Volatility

EIPX vs. FTWO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX) is 4.01%, while Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) has a volatility of 5.79%. This indicates that EIPX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTWO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EIPX	FTWO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.01%	5.79%	-1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.50%	14.59%	-6.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.17%	18.09%	-6.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.06%	19.23%	-4.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.06%	19.23%	-4.17%

EIPX vs. FTWO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EIPX has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FTWO's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

EIPX vs. FTWO - Dividend Comparison

EIPX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, more than FTWO's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	2.68%	3.23%	3.27%	3.48%	0.34%
FTWO Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF	1.01%	1.02%	1.23%	0.59%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EIPX and FTWO in my portfolio?

EIPX and FTWO have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EIPX or FTWO?

FTWO has higher volatility (5.79%) compared to EIPX (4.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EIPX dropped -15.43% vs FTWO's -18.17%.

Which ETF is better, EIPX or FTWO?

On 1-year performance, FTWO leads with 30.91% vs 30.04% for EIPX. On fees, FTWO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, EIPX has been the lower-risk option at 4.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EIPX or FTWO?

Over the 1-year period, FTWO has performed better with a 30.91% return vs 30.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EIPX or FTWO?

FTWO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for EIPX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EIPX or FTWO?

EIPX has the higher dividend yield at 2.68%, compared with 1.01% for FTWO.

What is the main difference between EIPX and FTWO?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Strive. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for EIPX and 0.49% for FTWO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EIPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 1.72), 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.