IFRA vs. SMH

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

IFRA (iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF) and SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IFRA is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the NYSE FactSet U.S. Infrastructure Index, while SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IFRA returned 13.63%/yr vs 39.72%/yr for SMH. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IFRA charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.

Performance

IFRA vs. SMH - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFRA achieves a 19.01% return, which is significantly lower than SMH's 79.69% return.

IFRA

• 1D: 0.44%
• 1M: 2.86%
• YTD: 19.01%
• 6M: 17.73%
• 1Y: 31.64%
• 3Y*: 19.65%
• 5Y*: 13.63%
• 10Y*: —

SMH

• 1D: 4.38%
• 1M: 16.31%
• YTD: 79.69%
• 6M: 83.94%
• 1Y: 152.58%
• 3Y*: 62.32%
• 5Y*: 39.72%
• 10Y*: 38.18%

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

IFRA vs. SMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IFRA iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF	19.01%	15.90%	17.02%	13.42%	-3.32%	29.81%	7.37%	27.00%	-7.97%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	79.69%	49.17%	39.10%	73.38%	-33.53%	42.13%	55.53%	64.45%	-14.10%

Correlation

The correlation between IFRA and SMH is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2018	0.49

IFRA vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IFRA	SMH
Industrials	39.4%	-
Utilities	37.7%	-
Basic Materials	14.7%	-
Energy	7.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	100.0%

Return for Risk

IFRA vs. SMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

IFRA

IFRA Risk / Return Rank: 75
IFRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
IFRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
IFRA Omega Ratio Rank: 65
IFRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
IFRA Martin Ratio Rank: 79

SMH

SMH Risk / Return Rank: 96
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 95
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

IFRA vs. SMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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	SMH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	4.61	-2.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.07	4.60	-1.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.65	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.78	10.28	-6.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.85	37.77	-23.92

IFRA vs. SMH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFRA Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the SMH Sharpe Ratio of 4.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFRA and SMH, 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. SMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFRA drawdown since its inception was -41.06%, smaller than the maximum SMH drawdown of -84.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFRA and SMH.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFRA	SMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.06%	-84.96%	+43.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.40%	-14.93%	+6.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.93%	-35.74%	+15.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.93%	-45.30%	+25.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.87%	0.00%	-0.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.13%	-41.04%	+35.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.29%	4.06%	-1.77%

Volatility

IFRA vs. SMH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF (IFRA) is 5.33%, while VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a volatility of 16.71%. This indicates that IFRA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IFRA	SMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.33%	16.71%	-11.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.64%	27.97%	-16.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.11%	33.39%	-18.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.98%	35.53%	-17.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.37%	32.86%	-11.49%

IFRA vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFRA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFRA vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison

IFRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.86%, more than SMH's 0.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IFRA iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF	1.86%	1.84%	1.75%	1.98%	1.98%	1.63%	2.08%	1.68%	2.50%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	0.17%	0.31%	0.44%	0.60%	1.18%	0.51%	0.69%	1.50%	1.88%	1.43%	0.80%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFRA and SMH in my portfolio?

IFRA and SMH have a correlation of 0.47, 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 SMH?

SMH has higher volatility (16.71%) compared to IFRA (5.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFRA dropped -41.06% vs SMH's -84.96%.

Which ETF is better, IFRA or SMH?

On 5-year performance, SMH leads with 39.72% vs 13.63% for IFRA. On fees, IFRA is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, IFRA has been the lower-risk option at 5.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IFRA or SMH?

Over the 5-year period, SMH has performed better with a 39.72% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFRA or SMH?

IFRA is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for SMH.

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

IFRA has the higher dividend yield at 1.86%, compared with 0.17% for SMH.

What is the main difference between IFRA and SMH?

IFRA is categorized as Industrials Equities, while SMH is Semiconductors. IFRA tracks NYSE FactSet U.S. Infrastructure Index, while SMH tracks MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for IFRA and 0.35% for SMH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.61 vs 2.11), 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.