PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ICLN vs. IFRA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ICLN vs. IFRA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICLN achieves a 40.54% return, which is significantly higher than IFRA's 16.86% return.


ICLN

1D
-2.78%
1M
11.22%
YTD
40.54%
6M
39.84%
1Y
83.73%
3Y*
8.92%
5Y*
2.10%
10Y*
11.99%

IFRA

1D
0.20%
1M
-1.29%
YTD
16.86%
6M
16.28%
1Y
28.44%
3Y*
20.10%
5Y*
13.03%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ICLN vs. IFRA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ICLN
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
40.54%47.05%-25.72%-20.41%-5.43%-24.18%141.82%44.36%-13.13%
IFRA
iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF
16.86%15.90%17.02%13.42%-3.32%29.81%7.37%27.00%-8.57%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLN and IFRA is 0.50, 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

0.50

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.56

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 6, 2018

0.55

The correlation between ICLN and IFRA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

ICLN vs. IFRA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ICLN
IFRA

Utilities

32.8%
37.7%

Industrials

27.8%
39.4%

Energy

26.4%
7.9%

Technology

11.1%

-

Basic Materials

1.1%
14.7%

Consumer Cyclical

0.1%
0.0%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

0.0%

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

ICLN
32.8%
IFRA
37.7%

Industrials

ICLN
27.8%
IFRA
39.4%

Energy

ICLN
26.4%
IFRA
7.9%

Technology

ICLN
11.1%
IFRA

-

Basic Materials

ICLN
1.1%
IFRA
14.7%

Consumer Cyclical

ICLN
0.1%
IFRA
0.0%

Communication Services

ICLN

-

IFRA

-

Consumer Defensive

ICLN

-

IFRA
0.0%

Financial Services

ICLN

-

IFRA

-

Healthcare

ICLN

-

IFRA

-

Real Estate

ICLN

-

IFRA

-

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

ICLN vs. IFRA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLN
ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

IFRA
IFRA Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
IFRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFRA Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
IFRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFRA Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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.

ICLN vs. IFRA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) and iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA). 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.


ICLNIFRADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.33

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.50

3.40

+4.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.35

12.70

+8.65

ICLN vs. IFRA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLN Sharpe Ratio is 3.20, which is higher than the IFRA Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLN and IFRA, 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


ICLNIFRADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.20

1.94

+1.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.08

0.73

-0.65

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.08

0.63

-0.71

Drawdowns

ICLN vs. IFRA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLN drawdown since its inception was -87.15%, which is greater than IFRA's maximum drawdown of -41.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLN and IFRA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ICLNIFRADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-87.15%

-41.06%

-46.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.22%

-8.40%

-2.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-43.18%

-19.93%

-23.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-57.16%

-19.93%

-37.23%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-66.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-37.13%

-2.66%

-34.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-66.61%

-5.14%

-61.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.94%

2.25%

+1.69%

Volatility

ICLN vs. IFRA - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a higher volatility of 9.53% compared to iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA) at 4.89%. This indicates that ICLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IFRA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ICLNIFRADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.53%

4.89%

+4.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.21%

11.32%

+8.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.38%

14.79%

+11.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.21%

17.92%

+9.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.20%

21.38%

+5.82%

ICLN vs. IFRA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLN has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than IFRA's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

ICLN vs. IFRA - Dividend Comparison

ICLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, less than IFRA's 1.59% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ICLN
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
1.16%1.63%1.85%1.59%0.89%1.18%0.34%1.36%2.77%2.49%3.88%2.36%
IFRA
iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF
1.59%1.84%1.75%1.98%1.98%1.63%2.08%1.68%2.50%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ICLN and IFRA have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ICLN has higher volatility (9.53%) compared to IFRA (4.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLN dropped -87.15% vs IFRA's -41.06%.

On 5-year performance, IFRA leads with 13.03% vs 2.10% for ICLN. On fees, IFRA is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, IFRA has been the lower-risk option at 4.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IFRA has performed better with a 13.03% return vs 2.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IFRA is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.46% for ICLN.

IFRA has the higher dividend yield at 1.59%, compared with 1.16% for ICLN.

ICLN is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while IFRA is Industrials Equities. ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index, while IFRA tracks NYSE FactSet U.S. Infrastructure Index. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for ICLN and 0.30% for IFRA.

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.20 vs 1.94), 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 ICLN and IFRA

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