PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMIF vs. IGF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMIF vs. IGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMIF achieves a 0.44% return, which is significantly lower than IGF's 10.41% return. Over the past 10 years, EMIF has underperformed IGF with an annualized return of 1.66%, while IGF has yielded a comparatively higher 8.14% annualized return.


EMIF

1D
-0.46%
1M
0.38%
6M
-7.11%
YTD
0.44%
1Y
16.15%
3Y*
10.24%
5Y*
5.68%
10Y*
1.66%
ALL TIME*
3.28%

IGF

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.09%
6M
5.19%
YTD
10.41%
1Y
16.30%
3Y*
16.16%
5Y*
11.05%
10Y*
8.14%
ALL TIME*
4.91%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$49.09K$40.45K$71.84K
$38.15M$37.64M$47.97M

EMIF vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMIF
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF
0.44%33.90%1.21%5.67%-12.59%3.76%-19.98%16.36%-13.70%20.70%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
10.41%21.31%14.81%6.14%-1.26%11.57%-6.50%25.82%-9.95%19.31%

Correlation

The correlation between EMIF and IGF is 0.56, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.56

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.57

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.53

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 19, 2009

0.64

The correlation between EMIF and IGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (5 years) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMIF vs. IGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMIF
IGF

Industrials

44.6%
36.4%

Utilities

37.1%
40.0%

Energy

18.3%
20.5%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Technology

-

-

Industrials

EMIF
44.6%
IGF
36.4%

Utilities

EMIF
37.1%
IGF
40.0%

Energy

EMIF
18.3%
IGF
20.5%

Basic Materials

EMIF

-

IGF

-

Communication Services

EMIF

-

IGF

-

Consumer Cyclical

EMIF

-

IGF

-

Consumer Defensive

EMIF

-

IGF

-

Financial Services

EMIF

-

IGF

-

Healthcare

EMIF

-

IGF

-

Real Estate

EMIF

-

IGF
0.1%

Technology

EMIF

-

IGF

-

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

EMIF vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EMIF
EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank

IGF
IGF Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EMIF vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) 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.


EMIFIGFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.28

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.00

2.83

-1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.23

7.59

-5.35

EMIF vs. IGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMIF Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the IGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMIF and IGF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

EMIF vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMIF drawdown since its inception was -48.02%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMIF and IGF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMIFIGFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.02%

-58.33%

+10.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.71%

-5.87%

-9.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.70%

-11.31%

-5.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.29%

-20.83%

-2.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.02%

-42.11%

-5.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.57%

-2.34%

-11.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.89%

-11.79%

-4.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.00%

2.19%

+4.81%

Volatility

EMIF vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison

iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) has a higher volatility of 4.41% compared to iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) at 2.75%. This indicates that EMIF'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


EMIFIGFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.41%

2.75%

+1.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.24%

8.92%

+4.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.21%

10.69%

+5.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.67%

13.95%

+5.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.54%

16.71%

+3.83%

EMIF vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMIF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMIF vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison

EMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.21%, more than IGF's 2.89% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMIF
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF
4.21%4.96%4.12%2.64%3.08%3.94%2.54%2.07%2.64%2.58%3.16%2.07%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
2.89%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


EMIF and IGF have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMIF has higher volatility (4.41%) compared to IGF (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMIF dropped -48.02% vs IGF's -58.33%.

On 10-year performance, IGF leads with 8.14% vs 1.66% for EMIF. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IGF has performed better with a 8.14% return vs 1.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMIF.

EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.21%, compared with 2.89% for IGF.

EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMIF and 0.39% for IGF.

IGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 0.97), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMIF 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