FLV vs. IGF
FLV (American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF) and IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by American Century, while IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index. FLV is actively managed, while IGF is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLV returned 8.47%/yr vs 10.15%/yr for IGF. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLV charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IGF.
Performance
FLV vs. IGF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLV achieves a 5.79% return, which is significantly lower than IGF's 8.05% return.
FLV
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- 1.00%
- YTD
- 5.79%
- 6M
- 6.27%
- 1Y
- 18.84%
- 3Y*
- 13.48%
- 5Y*
- 8.47%
- 10Y*
- —
IGF
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- -1.85%
- YTD
- 8.05%
- 6M
- 7.91%
- 1Y
- 15.30%
- 3Y*
- 15.91%
- 5Y*
- 10.15%
- 10Y*
- 8.29%
FLV vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLV American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF | 5.79% | 15.80% | 11.51% | 6.23% | 0.94% | 17.30% | 39.27% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 8.05% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 6.14% | -1.26% | 11.57% | 35.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLV and IGF is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2020 | 0.73 |
The correlation between FLV and IGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (1 year) to 0.73 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FLV vs. IGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLV
IGF
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Industrials
Technology
-
Energy
Utilities
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
Financial Services
FLV
IGF
-
Healthcare
FLV
IGF
-
Consumer Defensive
FLV
IGF
-
Industrials
FLV
IGF
Technology
FLV
IGF
-
Energy
FLV
IGF
Utilities
FLV
IGF
Communication Services
FLV
IGF
-
Consumer Cyclical
FLV
IGF
-
Basic Materials
FLV
IGF
-
Real Estate
FLV
IGF
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
FLV vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank
FLV
IGF
FLV vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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.
| FLV | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.26 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.51 | 2.62 | -0.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.88 | 8.05 | -0.18 |
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
| FLV | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.89 | 1.47 | +0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 | 0.73 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.07 | 0.24 | +0.83 |
Drawdowns
FLV vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLV drawdown since its inception was -15.06%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLV and IGF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLV | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.06% | -58.33% | +43.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -5.87% | -1.66% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.42% | -14.28% | +1.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.06% | -20.83% | +5.77% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.11% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.32% | -4.43% | +2.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.73% | -11.87% | +9.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.40% | 1.90% | +0.50% |
Volatility
FLV vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) is 2.45%, while iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) has a volatility of 3.68%. This indicates that FLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLV | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.45% | 3.68% | -1.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.25% | 8.59% | -1.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.03% | 10.49% | -0.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.70% | 13.99% | -1.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.25% | 16.83% | -2.58% |
FLV vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLV has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLV vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison
FLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, less than IGF's 2.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLV American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF | 1.67% | 1.90% | 2.07% | 2.07% | 4.98% | 4.05% | 0.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.98% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLV and IGF have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IGF has higher volatility (3.68%) compared to FLV (2.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLV dropped -15.06% vs IGF's -58.33%.
On 5-year performance, IGF leads with 10.15% vs 8.47% for FLV. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IGF has performed better with a 10.15% return vs 8.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for FLV.
IGF has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 1.67% for FLV.
FLV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while IGF is Industrials Equities. They also come from different issuers: American Century and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for FLV and 0.39% for IGF.
FLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.47), 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 FLV and IGF
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