PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ENFR vs. IWS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ENFR vs. IWS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and iShares Russell Mid-Cap Value ETF (IWS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

ENFR vs. IWS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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

98.8%
7.7%

Industrials

3.4%
16.5%

Utilities

1.0%
6.5%

Financial Services

0.2%
13.7%

Basic Materials

-

5.4%

Communication Services

-

3.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

4.8%

Healthcare

-

7.5%

Real Estate

-

8.2%

Technology

-

18.2%

Energy

ENFR
98.8%
IWS
7.7%

Industrials

ENFR
3.4%
IWS
16.5%

Utilities

ENFR
1.0%
IWS
6.5%

Financial Services

ENFR
0.2%
IWS
13.7%

Basic Materials

ENFR

-

IWS
5.4%

Communication Services

ENFR

-

IWS
3.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ENFR

-

IWS
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

ENFR

-

IWS
4.8%

Healthcare

ENFR

-

IWS
7.5%

Real Estate

ENFR

-

IWS
8.2%

Technology

ENFR

-

IWS
18.2%

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

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

ENFR
ENFR Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
ENFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ENFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
ENFR Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
ENFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
ENFR Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

IWS
IWS Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
IWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWS Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
IWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWS Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


ENFRIWSDifference
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

ENFR vs. IWS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is comparable to the IWS Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENFR and IWS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ENFRIWSDifference

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


ENFRIWSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.15%

-1.83%

-3.32%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.97%

-8.02%

-7.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


ENFRIWSDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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