EMLP vs. IAU
EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) and IAU (iShares Gold Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - EMLP is a MLPs fund actively managed by First Trust, while IAU is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price. EMLP is actively managed, while IAU is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMLP returned 10.37%/yr vs 12.31%/yr for IAU. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMLP charges 0.96%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IAU.
Performance
EMLP vs. IAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMLP achieves a 15.76% return, which is significantly higher than IAU's -2.44% return. Over the past 10 years, EMLP has underperformed IAU with an annualized return of 10.37%, while IAU has yielded a comparatively higher 12.31% annualized return.
EMLP
- 1D
- 0.79%
- 1M
- -1.31%
- YTD
- 15.76%
- 6M
- 15.73%
- 1Y
- 19.70%
- 3Y*
- 21.55%
- 5Y*
- 15.13%
- 10Y*
- 10.37%
IAU
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -9.54%
- YTD
- -2.44%
- 6M
- -2.22%
- 1Y
- 22.32%
- 3Y*
- 29.07%
- 5Y*
- 17.23%
- 10Y*
- 12.31%
EMLP vs. IAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund | 15.76% | 9.67% | 33.39% | 8.05% | 10.39% | 23.20% | -13.36% | 23.40% | -8.70% | 1.07% |
IAU iShares Gold Trust | -2.44% | 63.95% | 26.85% | 12.84% | -0.63% | -4.00% | 25.03% | 17.98% | -1.76% | 12.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMLP and IAU is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2012 | 0.13 |
The correlation between EMLP and IAU shifts across timeframes, from 0.10 (1 year) to 0.21 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
EMLP vs. IAU - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EMLP
IAU
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
-
Energy
EMLP
IAU
-
Utilities
EMLP
IAU
-
Industrials
EMLP
IAU
-
Basic Materials
EMLP
IAU
-
Communication Services
EMLP
-
IAU
-
Consumer Cyclical
EMLP
-
IAU
-
Consumer Defensive
EMLP
-
IAU
-
Financial Services
EMLP
-
IAU
-
Healthcare
EMLP
-
IAU
-
Real Estate
EMLP
-
IAU
Technology
EMLP
-
IAU
-
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
EMLP vs. IAU — Risk / Return Rank
EMLP
IAU
EMLP vs. IAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) and iShares Gold Trust (IAU). 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.
| EMLP | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.19 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.03 | 0.99 | +3.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.36 | 2.83 | +9.53 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMLP vs. IAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMLP drawdown since its inception was -43.61%, roughly equal to the maximum IAU drawdown of -45.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLP and IAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMLP | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.61% | -45.14% | +1.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.94% | -24.40% | +19.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.47% | -24.40% | +12.93% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.59% | -24.40% | +9.81% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -43.61% | -24.40% | -19.21% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.66% | -22.03% | +19.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.75% | -15.97% | +10.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.61% | 8.47% | -6.86% |
Volatility
EMLP vs. IAU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) is 3.79%, while iShares Gold Trust (IAU) has a volatility of 7.70%. This indicates that EMLP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMLP | IAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.79% | 7.70% | -3.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.86% | 23.94% | -16.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.87% | 27.17% | -17.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.53% | 18.16% | -3.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.69% | 16.02% | +1.67% |
EMLP vs. IAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMLP has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is higher than IAU's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMLP vs. IAU - Dividend Comparison
EMLP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, while IAU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund | 2.76% | 3.18% | 3.19% | 3.92% | 3.15% | 3.29% | 4.70% | 3.71% | 4.71% | 3.80% | 3.62% | 4.63% |
IAU iShares Gold Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMLP and IAU have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IAU has higher volatility (7.70%) compared to EMLP (3.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLP dropped -43.61% vs IAU's -45.14%.
On 10-year performance, IAU leads with 12.31% vs 10.37% for EMLP. On fees, IAU is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 3.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IAU has performed better with a 12.31% return vs 10.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IAU is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.
EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 0.00% for IAU.
EMLP is categorized as MLPs, while IAU is Gold. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.96% for EMLP and 0.25% for IAU.
EMLP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 0.89), 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.
Find the right allocation for EMLP and IAU
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