GII vs. FPWR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GII (SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF) and FPWR (First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF) are both Utilities Equities funds. GII is passively managed, while FPWR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GII returned 10.67%/yr vs 12.46%/yr for FPWR. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GII charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for FPWR.

Performance

GII vs. FPWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF (GII) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GII achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly lower than FPWR's 14.10% return.

GII

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -0.25%
• YTD: 9.45%
• 6M: 8.82%
• 1Y: 17.64%
• 3Y*: 16.77%
• 5Y*: 10.67%
• 10Y*: 8.70%

FPWR

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -0.82%
• YTD: 14.10%
• 6M: 14.06%
• 1Y: 20.93%
• 3Y*: 18.24%
• 5Y*: 12.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

GII vs. FPWR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
GII SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF	9.45%	21.79%	14.30%	5.90%	-0.54%	11.39%	-6.81%	7.85%
FPWR First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF	14.10%	16.78%	22.60%	-3.36%	5.28%	12.26%	8.98%	5.66%

Correlation

The correlation between GII and FPWR is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2019	0.79

The correlation between GII and FPWR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

GII vs. FPWR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GII	FPWR
Industrials	27.8%	6.7%
Utilities	25.9%	51.7%
Energy	20.3%	30.0%
Financial Services	4.8%	1.7%
Technology	2.5%	-
Communication Services	0.3%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

GII vs. FPWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GII

GII Risk / Return Rank: 52
GII Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
GII Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
GII Omega Ratio Rank: 48
GII Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
GII Martin Ratio Rank: 52

FPWR

FPWR Risk / Return Rank: 70
FPWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
FPWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
FPWR Omega Ratio Rank: 64
FPWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FPWR Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

GII vs. FPWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF (GII) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR). 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.

	GII	FPWR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	2.00	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.28	2.89	-0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.35	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	4.19	-1.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.50	10.54	-2.03

GII vs. FPWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GII Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the FPWR Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GII and FPWR, 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

GII vs. FPWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GII drawdown since its inception was -50.98%, which is greater than FPWR's maximum drawdown of -32.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GII and FPWR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GII	FPWR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.98%	-32.28%	-18.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.94%	-5.02%	-0.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.31%	-14.68%	+0.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.67%	-19.88%	-0.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.03%	-1.98%	-1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.49%	-4.98%	-6.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.08%	1.99%	+0.09%

Volatility

GII vs. FPWR - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF (GII) and First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF (FPWR) have volatilities of 3.57% and 3.60%, 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

	GII	FPWR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.57%	3.60%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.96%	8.20%	+0.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.86%	10.57%	+0.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.09%	14.21%	-0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.08%	17.36%	-0.28%

GII vs. FPWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GII has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than FPWR's 0.96% expense ratio.

Dividends

GII vs. FPWR - Dividend Comparison

GII's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%, more than FPWR's 1.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FPWR First Trust EIP Power Solutions ETF	1.80%	1.97%	2.52%	2.54%	1.72%	1.66%	1.68%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GII SPDR S&P Global Infrastructure ETF	2.67%	3.17%	3.23%	3.70%	3.07%	2.37%	2.66%	3.39%	3.31%	3.38%	3.11%	3.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GII and FPWR in my portfolio?

GII and FPWR have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GII or FPWR?

FPWR has higher volatility (3.60%) compared to GII (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GII dropped -50.98% vs FPWR's -32.28%.

Which ETF is better, GII or FPWR?

On 5-year performance, FPWR leads with 12.46% vs 10.67% for GII. On fees, GII is cheaper at 0.40% 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, GII or FPWR?

Over the 5-year period, FPWR has performed better with a 12.46% return vs 10.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GII or FPWR?

GII is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for FPWR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GII or FPWR?

GII has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 1.80% for FPWR.

What is the main difference between GII and FPWR?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GII and 0.96% for FPWR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FPWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.63), 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.