IGF vs. BILT

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT).

IGF and BILT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IGF is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P Global Infrastructure Index. It was launched on Dec 10, 2007. BILT is an actively managed fund by iShares. It was launched on Jul 29, 2025.

Performance

IGF vs. BILT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

IGF vs. BILT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF	9.19%	5.55%
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	11.38%	3.99%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IGF achieves a 9.19% return, which is significantly lower than BILT's 11.38% return.

IGF

• 1D: 0.80%
• 1M: -3.42%
• YTD: 9.19%
• 6M: 11.40%
• 1Y: 26.64%
• 3Y*: 15.76%
• 5Y*: 11.38%
• 10Y*: 8.80%

BILT

• 1D: 0.72%
• 1M: -3.01%
• YTD: 11.38%
• 6M: 12.22%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IGF vs. BILT - Expense Ratio Comparison

IGF has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than BILT's 0.60% expense ratio.

BILT

iShares Infrastructure Active ETF

IGF

iShares Global Infrastructure ETF

Return for Risk

IGF vs. BILT — Risk / Return Rank

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

IGF

IGF Risk / Return Rank: 93
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 94
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

IGF vs. BILT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT). 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.

	IGF	BILT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.62	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IGF	BILT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.24	2.66	-2.41

Correlation

The correlation between IGF and BILT is 0.80, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

IGF vs. BILT - Dividend Comparison

IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, more than BILT's 1.34% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF	2.95%	3.23%	3.21%	3.36%	2.67%	2.42%	2.33%	3.27%	3.52%	2.95%	2.98%	3.25%
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF	1.34%	0.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

IGF vs. BILT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IGF drawdown since its inception was -58.33%, which is greater than BILT's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGF and BILT.

Drawdown Indicators

	IGF	BILT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.33%	-5.38%	-52.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.74%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.83%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.11%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.42%	-3.01%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.96%	-1.39%	-10.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.74%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IGF	BILT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.25%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.33%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.73%	9.37%	+3.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.89%	9.37%	+4.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.81%	9.37%	+7.44%