IGF vs. BILT
IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) and BILT (iShares Infrastructure Active ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds from iShares. IGF is passively managed, while BILT is actively managed. Over the past year, IGF returned 15.64% vs 17.39% for BILT. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IGF charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for BILT.
Performance
IGF vs. BILT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IGF achieves a 9.79% return, which is significantly lower than BILT's 13.73% return.
IGF
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- -0.66%
- 6M
- 5.32%
- YTD
- 9.79%
- 1Y
- 15.64%
- 3Y*
- 16.82%
- 5Y*
- 10.96%
- 10Y*
- 8.05%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.88%
BILT
- 1D
- -0.50%
- 1M
- -1.54%
- 6M
- 9.37%
- YTD
- 13.73%
- 1Y
- 17.39%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 18.31%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $2.26M | $1.67M | $1.68M | |
| $81.88M | $57.63M | $54.97M |
IGF vs. BILT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 9.79% | 5.40% |
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF | 13.73% | 4.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between IGF and BILT is 0.79, 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. | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2025 | 0.79 |
The correlation between IGF and BILT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
IGF vs. BILT — Risk / Return Rank
IGF
BILT
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.
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.
| IGF | BILT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.30 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.68 | 3.25 | -0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.15 | 9.73 | -2.58 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IGF | BILT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.33% | -5.38% | -52.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.87% | -5.38% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.83% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.11% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.89% | -2.73% | -0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.79% | -1.37% | -10.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | 1.79% | +0.40% |
Volatility
IGF vs. BILT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) is 2.28%, while iShares Infrastructure Active ETF (BILT) has a volatility of 2.62%. This indicates that IGF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BILT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IGF | BILT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.28% | 2.62% | -0.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.92% | 8.46% | +0.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.72% | 10.32% | +0.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.95% | 10.30% | +3.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.71% | 10.30% | +6.41% |
IGF vs. BILT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IGF has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than BILT's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
IGF vs. BILT - Dividend Comparison
IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, less than BILT's 5.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BILT iShares Infrastructure Active ETF | 5.73% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.90% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IGF and BILT have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BILT has higher volatility (2.62%) compared to IGF (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGF dropped -58.33% vs BILT's -5.38%.
On 1-year performance, BILT leads with 17.39% vs 15.64% for IGF. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 2.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BILT has performed better with a 17.39% return vs 15.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BILT.
BILT has the higher dividend yield at 5.73%, compared with 2.90% for IGF.
Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IGF and 0.60% for BILT.
BILT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.47), 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.
Find the right allocation for IGF and BILT
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