IGF vs. SEA

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) and SEA (U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF) are both Industrials Equities funds - IGF tracks the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net) while SEA tracks the U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IGF returned 15.89%/yr vs 16.20%/yr for SEA. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IGF charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for SEA.

Performance

IGF vs. SEA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IGF achieves a 10.74% return, which is significantly lower than SEA's 21.56% return.

IGF

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 0.97%
• 6M: 9.87%
• YTD: 10.74%
• 1Y: 17.66%
• 3Y*: 15.89%
• 5Y*: 11.06%
• 10Y*: 8.23%

SEA

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: -1.59%
• 6M: 15.11%
• YTD: 21.56%
• 1Y: 28.55%
• 3Y*: 16.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IGF vs. SEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF	10.74%	21.31%	14.81%	6.14%	-1.46%
SEA U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF	21.56%	16.78%	2.52%	19.33%	-18.36%

Correlation

The correlation between IGF and SEA is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 20, 2022	0.50

IGF vs. SEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IGF	SEA
Industrials	40.6%	89.6%
Utilities	39.7%	-
Energy	19.6%	8.4%
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	0.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Technology	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

IGF vs. SEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IGF

IGF Risk / Return Rank: 64
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 62
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 60

SEA

SEA Risk / Return Rank: 66
SEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
SEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
SEA Omega Ratio Rank: 60
SEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
SEA Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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. SEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF (SEA). 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	SEA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	1.69	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	2.44	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.29	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	2.69	+0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.32	9.78	-1.47

IGF vs. SEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the SEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IGF and SEA, 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. SEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IGF drawdown since its inception was -58.33%, which is greater than SEA's maximum drawdown of -39.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGF and SEA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IGF	SEA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.33%	-39.53%	-18.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.87%	-10.67%	+4.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.28%	-32.42%	+18.14%
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	-2.04%	-2.45%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.82%	-14.07%	+2.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.13%	2.93%	-0.80%

Volatility

IGF vs. SEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) is 3.32%, while U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF (SEA) has a volatility of 6.03%. This indicates that IGF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IGF	SEA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.32%	6.03%	-2.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.95%	13.13%	-4.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.73%	16.98%	-6.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.97%	21.61%	-7.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.71%	21.61%	-4.90%

IGF vs. SEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

IGF vs. SEA - Dividend Comparison

IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%, less than SEA's 5.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF	2.88%	3.23%	3.21%	3.36%	2.67%	2.42%	2.33%	3.27%	3.52%	2.95%	2.98%	3.25%
SEA U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo ETF	5.56%	6.76%	18.47%	9.85%	18.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IGF and SEA in my portfolio?

IGF and SEA have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IGF or SEA?

SEA has higher volatility (6.03%) compared to IGF (3.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGF dropped -58.33% vs SEA's -39.53%.

Which ETF is better, IGF or SEA?

On 3-year performance, SEA leads with 16.20% vs 15.89% for IGF. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 3.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IGF or SEA?

Over the 3-year period, SEA has performed better with a 16.20% return vs 15.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IGF or SEA?

IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SEA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IGF or SEA?

SEA has the higher dividend yield at 5.56%, compared with 2.88% for IGF.

What is the main difference between IGF and SEA?

IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), while SEA tracks U.S. Global Sea to Sky Cargo Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: iShares and US Global. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IGF and 0.60% for SEA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs 1.66), 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.