ENFR vs. PG

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) is Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index, while PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, ENFR returned 12.28%/yr vs 8.96%/yr for PG. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

ENFR vs. PG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and The Procter & Gamble Company (PG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ENFR achieves a 25.97% return, which is significantly higher than PG's 5.93% return. Over the past 10 years, ENFR has outperformed PG with an annualized return of 12.28%, while PG has yielded a comparatively lower 8.96% annualized return.

ENFR

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: 0.52%
• YTD: 25.97%
• 6M: 26.39%
• 1Y: 26.50%
• 3Y*: 28.39%
• 5Y*: 19.43%
• 10Y*: 12.28%

PG

• 1D: 0.86%
• 1M: 5.18%
• YTD: 5.93%
• 6M: 6.28%
• 1Y: -5.68%
• 3Y*: 3.69%
• 5Y*: 4.73%
• 10Y*: 8.96%

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

ENFR vs. PG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	25.97%	5.88%	42.17%	15.63%	17.48%	39.97%	-24.14%	21.60%	-18.67%	-0.19%
PG The Procter & Gamble Company	5.93%	-12.26%	17.25%	-0.86%	-5.05%	20.52%	14.15%	39.70%	3.57%	12.69%

Correlation

The correlation between ENFR and PG 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	0.08
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.13
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2013	0.17

The correlation between ENFR and PG shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ENFR vs. PG — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENFR

ENFR Risk / Return Rank: 62
ENFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
ENFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
ENFR Omega Ratio Rank: 59
ENFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
ENFR Martin Ratio Rank: 53

PG

PG Risk / Return Rank: 28
PG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
PG Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
PG Omega Ratio Rank: 26
PG Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
PG Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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. PG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and The Procter & Gamble Company (PG). 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.

	ENFR	PG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	-0.30	+2.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	-0.31	+2.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	0.97	+0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	-0.37	+3.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.18	-0.68	+8.86

ENFR vs. PG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is higher than the PG Sharpe Ratio of -0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENFR and PG, 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

ENFR vs. PG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENFR drawdown since its inception was -68.28%, which is greater than PG's maximum drawdown of -54.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENFR and PG.

Drawdown Indicators

	ENFR	PG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.28%	-54.25%	-14.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.64%	-15.52%	+6.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.58%	-21.15%	+5.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.29%	-23.77%	+3.48%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-62.64%	-23.77%	-38.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.91%	-13.29%	+9.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.95%	-12.16%	-3.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.25%	8.80%	-5.55%

Volatility

ENFR vs. PG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) is 5.63%, while The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) has a volatility of 6.99%. This indicates that ENFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ENFR	PG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.63%	6.99%	-1.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.48%	15.01%	-3.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.66%	18.78%	-4.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.30%	17.82%	+1.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.67%	19.05%	+5.62%

Dividends

ENFR vs. PG - Dividend Comparison

ENFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.98%, more than PG's 2.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	3.98%	4.77%	4.41%	5.48%	5.23%	7.86%	7.57%	5.81%	3.98%	2.98%	3.31%	3.34%
PG The Procter & Gamble Company	2.85%	2.91%	2.36%	2.55%	2.38%	2.08%	2.24%	2.37%	3.09%	2.98%	3.18%	3.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ENFR and PG in my portfolio?

ENFR and PG 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, ENFR or PG?

PG has higher volatility (6.99%) compared to ENFR (5.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENFR dropped -68.28% vs PG's -54.25%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ENFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs -0.30), 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.