EMLP vs. CIBR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) and CIBR (First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMLP is a MLPs fund actively managed by First Trust, while CIBR is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. EMLP is actively managed, while CIBR is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMLP returned 10.24%/yr vs 18.49%/yr for CIBR. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMLP charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CIBR.

Performance

EMLP vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMLP achieves a 14.62% return, which is significantly lower than CIBR's 28.52% return. Over the past 10 years, EMLP has underperformed CIBR with an annualized return of 10.24%, while CIBR has yielded a comparatively higher 18.49% annualized return.

EMLP

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: -3.08%
• YTD: 14.62%
• 6M: 13.20%
• 1Y: 18.77%
• 3Y*: 21.22%
• 5Y*: 15.47%
• 10Y*: 10.24%

CIBR

• 1D: -2.81%
• 1M: 31.43%
• YTD: 28.52%
• 6M: 24.03%
• 1Y: 25.78%
• 3Y*: 28.32%
• 5Y*: 16.28%
• 10Y*: 18.49%

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

EMLP vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	14.62%	9.67%	33.39%	8.05%	10.39%	23.20%	-13.36%	23.40%	-8.70%	1.07%
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	28.52%	13.06%	18.21%	39.71%	-26.46%	19.67%	50.53%	28.52%	1.47%	18.61%

Correlation

The correlation between EMLP and CIBR is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.03
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2015	0.37

The correlation between EMLP and CIBR shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.37 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMLP vs. CIBR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMLP	CIBR
Energy	48.1%	-
Utilities	47.4%	-
Industrials	3.9%	3.5%
Basic Materials	0.6%	-
Communication Services	-	2.6%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	94.0%

Return for Risk

EMLP vs. CIBR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMLP

EMLP Risk / Return Rank: 61
EMLP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
EMLP Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
EMLP Omega Ratio Rank: 51
EMLP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
EMLP Martin Ratio Rank: 67

CIBR

CIBR Risk / Return Rank: 26
CIBR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
CIBR Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
CIBR Omega Ratio Rank: 29
CIBR Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
CIBR Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

EMLP vs. CIBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). 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.

	EMLP	CIBR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	1.06	+0.84
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	1.56	+1.16
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.20	+0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.82	1.18	+2.64
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.42	2.79	+9.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMLP vs. CIBR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMLP Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is higher than the CIBR Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMLP and CIBR, 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

	EMLP	CIBR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.89	1.06	+0.84
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.07	0.66	+0.41
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.79	-0.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	0.67	-0.10

Drawdowns

EMLP vs. CIBR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMLP drawdown since its inception was -43.61%, which is greater than CIBR's maximum drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLP and CIBR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMLP	CIBR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.61%	-33.89%	-9.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.94%	-21.99%	+17.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.47%	-21.99%	+10.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.59%	-33.89%	+19.30%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.61%	-33.89%	-9.72%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.62%	-2.81%	-0.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.76%	-8.66%	+2.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.52%	9.25%	-7.73%

Volatility

EMLP vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) is 4.10%, while First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a volatility of 10.90%. This indicates that EMLP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIBR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMLP	CIBR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	10.90%	-6.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.87%	20.90%	-13.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.97%	24.50%	-14.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.53%	24.95%	-10.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.69%	23.60%	-5.91%

EMLP vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMLP has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than CIBR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMLP vs. CIBR - Dividend Comparison

EMLP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%, more than CIBR's 0.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	0.45%	0.42%	0.29%	0.42%	0.31%	0.59%	1.10%	0.23%	0.23%	0.10%	0.77%	0.58%
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	2.79%	3.18%	3.19%	3.92%	3.15%	3.29%	4.70%	3.71%	4.71%	3.80%	3.62%	4.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMLP and CIBR in my portfolio?

EMLP and CIBR have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMLP or CIBR?

CIBR has higher volatility (10.90%) compared to EMLP (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLP dropped -43.61% vs CIBR's -33.89%.

Which ETF is better, EMLP or CIBR?

On 10-year performance, CIBR leads with 18.49% vs 10.24% for EMLP. On fees, CIBR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMLP or CIBR?

Over the 10-year period, CIBR has performed better with a 18.49% return vs 10.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMLP or CIBR?

CIBR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMLP or CIBR?

EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.79%, compared with 0.45% for CIBR.

What is the main difference between EMLP and CIBR?

EMLP is categorized as MLPs, while CIBR is Technology Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for EMLP and 0.60% for CIBR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMLP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.06), 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.