IGF vs. EIMI.L

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) and EIMI.L (iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index, while EIMI.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IGF returned 8.67%/yr vs 10.60%/yr for EIMI.L. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IGF charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EIMI.L.

Performance

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IGF achieves a 9.68% return, which is significantly lower than EIMI.L's 22.83% return. Over the past 10 years, IGF has underperformed EIMI.L with an annualized return of 8.67%, while EIMI.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.60% annualized return.

IGF

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 9.68%
• 6M: 10.24%
• 1Y: 16.24%
• 3Y*: 16.28%
• 5Y*: 10.22%
• 10Y*: 8.67%

EIMI.L

• 1D: 3.53%
• 1M: 1.15%
• YTD: 22.83%
• 6M: 26.10%
• 1Y: 43.20%
• 3Y*: 21.64%
• 5Y*: 7.50%
• 10Y*: 10.60%

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

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF	9.68%	21.31%	14.81%	6.14%	-1.26%	11.57%	-6.50%	25.82%	-9.95%	19.31%
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF	22.83%	32.16%	7.36%	11.03%	-19.67%	-0.65%	18.80%	16.37%	-14.18%	36.94%

Correlation

The correlation between IGF and EIMI.L is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.38
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2014	0.45

The correlation between IGF and EIMI.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.45 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IGF	EIMI.L
Utilities	41.1%	2.2%
Industrials	38.8%	8.9%
Energy	20.1%	3.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	1.7%
Basic Materials	-	6.9%
Communication Services	-	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	9.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.3%
Financial Services	-	18.4%
Healthcare	-	3.7%
Technology	-	35.0%

Return for Risk

IGF vs. EIMI.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IGF

IGF Risk / Return Rank: 54
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 49
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 53

EIMI.L

EIMI.L Risk / Return Rank: 76
EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
EIMI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
EIMI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EIMI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
EIMI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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. EIMI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L). 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	EIMI.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	2.16	-0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	2.92	-0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.40	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.78	3.40	-0.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.03	11.76	-3.73

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IGF and EIMI.L, 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

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IGF drawdown since its inception was -58.33%, which is greater than EIMI.L's maximum drawdown of -38.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGF and EIMI.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	IGF	EIMI.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.33%	-38.73%	-19.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.87%	-12.66%	+6.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.28%	-17.44%	+3.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.83%	-35.45%	+14.62%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.11%	-38.73%	-3.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.98%	-3.75%	+0.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.86%	-13.99%	+2.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	3.66%	-1.62%

Volatility

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) is 3.85%, while iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) has a volatility of 8.37%. This indicates that IGF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EIMI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IGF	EIMI.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.85%	8.37%	-4.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.73%	17.62%	-8.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.58%	19.94%	-9.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.00%	18.46%	-4.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.83%	19.20%	-2.37%

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IGF has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than EIMI.L's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

IGF vs. EIMI.L - Dividend Comparison

IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.94%, while EIMI.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	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	2.94%	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

Can I hold both IGF and EIMI.L in my portfolio?

IGF and EIMI.L have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IGF or EIMI.L?

On fees, EIMI.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IGF or EIMI.L?

EIMI.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IGF.

What is the main difference between IGF and EIMI.L?

IGF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while EIMI.L is Emerging Markets Equities. IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index, while EIMI.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IGF and 0.18% for EIMI.L.