IFRA vs. BKGI

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IFRA (iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF) and BKGI (Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. IFRA is passively managed, while BKGI is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IFRA returned 16.79%/yr vs 21.24%/yr for BKGI. Their 0.66 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IFRA charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for BKGI.

Performance

IFRA vs. BKGI - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFRA achieves a 16.00% return, which is significantly higher than BKGI's 14.23% return.

IFRA

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -2.67%
• 6M: 8.92%
• YTD: 16.00%
• 1Y: 23.20%
• 3Y*: 16.79%
• 5Y*: 13.28%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.22%

BKGI

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 1.55%
• 6M: 8.99%
• YTD: 14.23%
• 1Y: 20.08%
• 3Y*: 21.24%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.98%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BKGI Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF	$18.95M	$14.99M	$11.61M
IFRA iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF	$20.72M	$20.65M	$23.36M

IFRA vs. BKGI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IFRA iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF	16.00%	15.90%	17.02%	13.42%	4.78%
BKGI Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF	14.23%	37.53%	12.35%	9.72%	8.54%

Correlation

The correlation between IFRA and BKGI is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2022	0.66

The correlation between IFRA and BKGI shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (1 year) to 0.66 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IFRA vs. BKGI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IFRA	BKGI
Utilities	37.8%	46.0%
Industrials	36.9%	11.5%
Basic Materials	17.1%	-
Energy	7.9%	21.1%
Consumer Cyclical	0.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	-
Communication Services	-	2.5%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	19.0%
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

IFRA vs. BKGI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IFRA

IFRA Risk / Return Rank: 65
IFRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
IFRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
IFRA Omega Ratio Rank: 55
IFRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
IFRA Martin Ratio Rank: 70

BKGI

BKGI Risk / Return Rank: 80
BKGI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
BKGI Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BKGI Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BKGI Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
BKGI Martin Ratio Rank: 79

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IFRA vs. BKGI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA) and Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF (BKGI). 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.

	IFRA	BKGI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.80	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.14	2.51	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.32	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.61	3.38	-0.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.59	10.08	-1.50

IFRA vs. BKGI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFRA Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the BKGI Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFRA and BKGI, 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

IFRA vs. BKGI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFRA drawdown since its inception was -41.06%, which is greater than BKGI's maximum drawdown of -14.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFRA and BKGI.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFRA	BKGI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.06%	-14.79%	-26.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.40%	-6.16%	-2.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.93%	-11.37%	-8.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.93%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.46%	-1.78%	-3.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.09%	-2.54%	-2.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.55%	2.06%	+0.49%

Volatility

IFRA vs. BKGI - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA) has a higher volatility of 4.01% compared to Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF (BKGI) at 3.04%. This indicates that IFRA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BKGI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IFRA	BKGI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.01%	3.04%	+0.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.02%	9.55%	+2.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.40%	11.58%	+3.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.87%	13.95%	+3.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.29%	13.95%	+7.34%

IFRA vs. BKGI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFRA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than BKGI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFRA vs. BKGI - Dividend Comparison

IFRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than BKGI's 2.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BKGI Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF	2.89%	2.65%	4.55%	4.55%	0.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IFRA iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF	1.61%	1.84%	1.75%	1.98%	1.98%	1.63%	2.08%	1.68%	2.50%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFRA and BKGI in my portfolio?

IFRA and BKGI have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IFRA or BKGI?

IFRA has higher volatility (4.01%) compared to BKGI (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFRA dropped -41.06% vs BKGI's -14.79%.

Which ETF is better, IFRA or BKGI?

On 3-year performance, BKGI leads with 21.24% vs 16.79% for IFRA. On fees, IFRA is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, BKGI has been the lower-risk option at 3.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IFRA or BKGI?

Over the 3-year period, BKGI has performed better with a 21.24% return vs 16.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFRA or BKGI?

IFRA is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BKGI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IFRA or BKGI?

BKGI has the higher dividend yield at 2.89%, compared with 1.61% for IFRA.

What is the main difference between IFRA and BKGI?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for IFRA and 0.65% for BKGI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKGI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.43), 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.