EMIF vs. MLPX

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EMIF (iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF) and MLPX (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds - EMIF tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index while MLPX tracks the Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMIF returned 1.66%/yr vs 12.35%/yr for MLPX. Their 0.37 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EMIF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for MLPX.

Performance

EMIF vs. MLPX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMIF achieves a 0.44% return, which is significantly lower than MLPX's 26.75% return. Over the past 10 years, EMIF has underperformed MLPX with an annualized return of 1.66%, while MLPX has yielded a comparatively higher 12.35% 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%

MLPX

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 2.91%
• 6M: 17.40%
• YTD: 26.75%
• 1Y: 26.87%
• 3Y*: 26.63%
• 5Y*: 22.92%
• 10Y*: 12.35%
• ALL TIME*: 9.35%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF	$49.09K	$40.45K	$71.84K
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	$36.85M	$35.99M	$31.05M

EMIF vs. MLPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	26.75%	4.96%	42.90%	15.77%	21.54%	39.63%	-20.32%	19.04%	-15.64%	-4.53%

Correlation

The correlation between EMIF and MLPX is -0.01, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.01
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.23
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.28
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 7, 2013	0.37

The correlation between EMIF and MLPX shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.37 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMIF vs. MLPX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMIF	MLPX
Industrials	44.6%	0.3%
Utilities	37.1%	0.4%
Energy	18.3%	99.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

EMIF vs. MLPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMIF

EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 35
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 38
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 27

MLPX

MLPX Risk / Return Rank: 74
MLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
MLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
MLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 70
MLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
MLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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. MLPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) and Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX). 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.

	EMIF	MLPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	1.71	-0.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.45	2.41	-0.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.29	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.00	3.27	-2.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.23	7.63	-5.40

EMIF vs. MLPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMIF Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the MLPX Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMIF and MLPX, 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

EMIF vs. MLPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMIF drawdown since its inception was -48.02%, smaller than the maximum MLPX drawdown of -70.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMIF and MLPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMIF	MLPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.02%	-70.67%	+22.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.71%	-8.18%	-7.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.70%	-16.77%	+0.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.29%	-19.72%	-3.57%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.02%	-64.70%	+16.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.57%	-3.27%	-10.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.89%	-16.47%	+0.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.00%	3.49%	+3.51%

Volatility

EMIF vs. MLPX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) is 4.41%, while Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) has a volatility of 5.46%. This indicates that EMIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MLPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMIF	MLPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.41%	5.46%	-1.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.24%	12.52%	+0.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.21%	15.68%	+0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.67%	19.90%	-0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.54%	26.14%	-5.60%

EMIF vs. MLPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMIF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than MLPX's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMIF vs. MLPX - Dividend Comparison

EMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.21%, more than MLPX's 4.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.05%	4.88%	4.30%	5.22%	5.23%	5.98%	8.32%	5.78%	5.77%	4.36%	5.50%	4.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMIF and MLPX in my portfolio?

EMIF and MLPX have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMIF or MLPX?

MLPX has higher volatility (5.46%) compared to EMIF (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMIF dropped -48.02% vs MLPX's -70.67%.

Which ETF is better, EMIF or MLPX?

On 10-year performance, MLPX leads with 12.35% vs 1.66% for EMIF. On fees, MLPX is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, EMIF has been the lower-risk option at 4.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMIF or MLPX?

Over the 10-year period, MLPX has performed better with a 12.35% return vs 1.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMIF or MLPX?

MLPX is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMIF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMIF or MLPX?

EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.21%, compared with 4.05% for MLPX.

What is the main difference between EMIF and MLPX?

EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while MLPX tracks Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMIF and 0.45% for MLPX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MLPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 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.