ENFR vs. UMI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. ENFR is passively managed, while UMI is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ENFR returned 20.07%/yr vs 20.61%/yr for UMI. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ENFR charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.

Performance

ENFR vs. UMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ENFR having a 24.93% return and UMI slightly lower at 23.69%.

ENFR

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: -4.52%
• YTD: 24.93%
• 6M: 25.03%
• 1Y: 27.76%
• 3Y*: 28.90%
• 5Y*: 20.07%
• 10Y*: 11.98%

UMI

• 1D: 1.58%
• 1M: -3.77%
• YTD: 23.69%
• 6M: 23.28%
• 1Y: 27.27%
• 3Y*: 28.51%
• 5Y*: 20.61%
• 10Y*: —

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

ENFR vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	24.93%	5.88%	42.17%	15.63%	17.48%	39.97%	-24.14%	21.60%	-18.67%	6.39%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	23.69%	5.11%	42.97%	14.60%	20.78%	20.97%	-8.25%	21.06%	-10.64%	2.76%

Correlation

The correlation between ENFR and UMI is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2017	0.80

The correlation between ENFR and UMI shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (all time) to 0.98 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ENFR vs. UMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ENFR	UMI
Energy	98.5%	99.0%
Industrials	3.4%	-
Utilities	1.4%	1.0%
Financial Services	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

ENFR vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENFR

ENFR Risk / Return Rank: 57
ENFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
ENFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ENFR Omega Ratio Rank: 54
ENFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ENFR Martin Ratio Rank: 50

UMI

UMI Risk / Return Rank: 62
UMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
UMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
UMI Omega Ratio Rank: 56
UMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
UMI Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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	UMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.88	1.92	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	2.64	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.33	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.23	3.65	-0.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.24	9.41	-1.17

ENFR vs. UMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the UMI Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENFR and UMI, 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. UMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENFR drawdown since its inception was -68.28%, which is greater than UMI's maximum drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENFR and UMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	ENFR	UMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-68.28%	-48.08%	-20.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.64%	-7.50%	-1.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.58%	-17.08%	+1.50%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.29%	-20.05%	-0.24%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-62.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.71%	-3.85%	-0.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.94%	-6.58%	-9.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.38%	2.90%	+0.48%

Volatility

ENFR vs. UMI - Volatility Comparison

Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) have volatilities of 5.69% and 5.61%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ENFR	UMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.69%	5.61%	+0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.60%	11.10%	+0.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.86%	14.28%	+0.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.25%	19.46%	-0.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.68%	23.16%	+1.52%

ENFR vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ENFR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

ENFR vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison

ENFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.02%, less than UMI's 5.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.02%	4.77%	4.41%	5.48%	5.23%	7.86%	7.57%	5.81%	3.98%	2.98%	3.31%	3.34%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	5.93%	6.23%	4.39%	4.67%	4.36%	3.00%	2.18%	2.47%	2.48%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ENFR and UMI in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, ENFR and UMI move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, ENFR or UMI?

ENFR has higher volatility (5.69%) compared to UMI (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENFR dropped -68.28% vs UMI's -48.08%.

Which ETF is better, ENFR or UMI?

On 5-year performance, UMI leads with 20.61% vs 20.07% for ENFR. On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ENFR or UMI?

Over the 5-year period, UMI has performed better with a 20.61% return vs 20.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ENFR or UMI?

ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ENFR or UMI?

UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.93%, compared with 4.02% for ENFR.

What is the main difference between ENFR and UMI?

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ENFR and 0.85% for UMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.88), 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.