ENFR vs. IWS
ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) and IWS (iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while IWS is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell Midcap Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ENFR returned 11.99%/yr vs 10.08%/yr for IWS. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ENFR charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for IWS.
Performance
ENFR vs. IWS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ENFR achieves a 24.34% return, which is significantly higher than IWS's 13.43% return. Over the past 10 years, ENFR has outperformed IWS with an annualized return of 11.99%, while IWS has yielded a comparatively lower 10.08% annualized return.
ENFR
- 1D
- -0.70%
- 1M
- 2.80%
- YTD
- 24.34%
- 6M
- 23.38%
- 1Y
- 25.73%
- 3Y*
- 27.67%
- 5Y*
- 19.49%
- 10Y*
- 11.99%
IWS
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 13.43%
- 6M
- 13.77%
- 1Y
- 24.70%
- 3Y*
- 16.23%
- 5Y*
- 8.15%
- 10Y*
- 10.08%
ENFR vs. IWS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 24.34% | 5.88% | 42.17% | 15.63% | 17.48% | 39.97% | -24.14% | 21.60% | -18.67% | -0.19% |
IWS iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF | 13.43% | 10.82% | 12.91% | 12.52% | -12.29% | 28.10% | 4.83% | 26.73% | -12.43% | 13.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between ENFR and IWS is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2013 | 0.62 |
Over the past year, the correlation between ENFR and IWS has dropped to 0.12 - well below their long-term average of 0.62, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
ENFR vs. IWS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ENFR
IWS
Energy
Industrials
Utilities
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Energy
ENFR
IWS
Industrials
ENFR
IWS
Utilities
ENFR
IWS
Financial Services
ENFR
IWS
Basic Materials
ENFR
-
IWS
Communication Services
ENFR
-
IWS
Consumer Cyclical
ENFR
-
IWS
Consumer Defensive
ENFR
-
IWS
Healthcare
ENFR
-
IWS
Real Estate
ENFR
-
IWS
Technology
ENFR
-
IWS
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
ENFR vs. IWS — Risk / Return Rank
ENFR
IWS
ENFR vs. IWS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (IWS). 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.
| ENFR | IWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.10 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.33 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.99 | 3.29 | -0.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.07 | 12.38 | -4.31 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ENFR | IWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.77 | 1.87 | -0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.02 | 0.47 | +0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.49 | 0.52 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 0.42 | -0.08 |
Drawdowns
ENFR vs. IWS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ENFR drawdown since its inception was -68.28%, which is greater than IWS's maximum drawdown of -62.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENFR and IWS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ENFR | IWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -68.28% | -62.40% | -5.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.64% | -7.53% | -1.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.58% | -20.57% | +4.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.29% | -21.23% | +0.94% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -62.64% | -43.83% | -18.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.15% | -1.83% | -3.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.97% | -8.02% | -7.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.20% | 2.00% | +1.20% |
Volatility
ENFR vs. IWS - Volatility Comparison
Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) has a higher volatility of 5.78% compared to iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (IWS) at 3.45%. This indicates that ENFR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ENFR | IWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.78% | 3.45% | +2.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.41% | 9.74% | +1.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.64% | 13.30% | +1.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.29% | 17.32% | +1.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.68% | 19.37% | +5.31% |
ENFR vs. IWS - Expense Ratio Comparison
ENFR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IWS's 0.23% expense ratio.
Dividends
ENFR vs. IWS - Dividend Comparison
ENFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.03%, more than IWS's 1.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 4.03% | 4.77% | 4.41% | 5.48% | 5.23% | 7.86% | 7.57% | 5.81% | 3.98% | 2.98% | 3.31% | 3.34% |
IWS iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF | 1.36% | 1.53% | 1.50% | 1.76% | 1.93% | 1.39% | 1.87% | 1.97% | 2.53% | 1.96% | 2.10% | 2.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ENFR and IWS have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ENFR has higher volatility (5.78%) compared to IWS (3.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENFR dropped -68.28% vs IWS's -62.40%.
On 10-year performance, ENFR leads with 11.99% vs 10.08% for IWS. On fees, IWS is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, IWS has been the lower-risk option at 3.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ENFR has performed better with a 11.99% return vs 10.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IWS is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ENFR.
ENFR has the higher dividend yield at 4.03%, compared with 1.36% for IWS.
ENFR is categorized as Energy Equities, while IWS is Mid Cap Value Equities. ENFR tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while IWS tracks Russell Midcap Value Index. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ENFR and 0.23% for IWS.
IWS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 1.77), 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 ENFR and IWS
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