IGF vs. VOO
IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) and VOO (Vanguard S&P 500 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), while VOO is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IGF returned 8.80%/yr vs 15.77%/yr for VOO. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IGF charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VOO.
Performance
IGF vs. VOO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IGF having a 9.70% return and VOO slightly higher at 9.75%. Over the past 10 years, IGF has underperformed VOO with an annualized return of 8.80%, while VOO has yielded a comparatively higher 15.77% annualized return.
IGF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- YTD
- 9.70%
- 6M
- 10.12%
- 1Y
- 18.50%
- 3Y*
- 16.79%
- 5Y*
- 10.87%
- 10Y*
- 8.80%
VOO
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 0.08%
- YTD
- 9.75%
- 6M
- 9.30%
- 1Y
- 26.77%
- 3Y*
- 21.36%
- 5Y*
- 13.58%
- 10Y*
- 15.77%
IGF vs. VOO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 9.70% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 6.14% | -1.26% | 11.57% | -6.50% | 25.82% | -9.95% | 19.31% |
VOO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF | 9.75% | 17.82% | 24.98% | 26.32% | -18.17% | 28.79% | 18.32% | 31.37% | -4.50% | 21.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between IGF and VOO 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 | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 9, 2010 | 0.71 |
Over the past year, the correlation between IGF and VOO has dropped to 0.47 - well below their long-term average of 0.71, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
IGF vs. VOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IGF
VOO
Industrials
Utilities
Energy
Real Estate
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
-
Industrials
IGF
VOO
Utilities
IGF
VOO
Energy
IGF
VOO
Real Estate
IGF
VOO
Basic Materials
IGF
-
VOO
Communication Services
IGF
-
VOO
Consumer Cyclical
IGF
-
VOO
Consumer Defensive
IGF
-
VOO
Financial Services
IGF
-
VOO
Healthcare
IGF
-
VOO
Technology
IGF
-
VOO
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. VOO — Risk / Return Rank
IGF
VOO
IGF vs. VOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO). 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 | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.41 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.39 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.17 | 3.02 | +0.15 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.98 | 13.58 | -4.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IGF vs. VOO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IGF drawdown since its inception was -58.33%, which is greater than VOO's maximum drawdown of -33.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGF and VOO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IGF | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.33% | -33.99% | -24.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.87% | -8.90% | +3.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.28% | -18.69% | +4.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.83% | -24.52% | +3.69% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.11% | -33.99% | -8.12% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.96% | -1.74% | -1.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.85% | -3.68% | -8.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | 1.98% | +0.08% |
Volatility
IGF vs. VOO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) is 3.38%, while Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) has a volatility of 4.60%. This indicates that IGF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VOO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IGF | VOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.38% | 4.60% | -1.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.73% | 9.73% | -1.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.58% | 12.39% | -1.81% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.97% | 16.90% | -2.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.82% | 18.05% | -1.23% |
IGF vs. VOO - Expense Ratio Comparison
IGF has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than VOO's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
IGF vs. VOO - Dividend Comparison
IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.91%, more than VOO's 1.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.91% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
VOO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF | 1.04% | 1.13% | 1.24% | 1.46% | 1.69% | 1.25% | 1.54% | 1.88% | 2.06% | 1.78% | 2.02% | 2.10% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IGF and VOO 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.
VOO has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to IGF (3.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGF dropped -58.33% vs VOO's -33.99%.
On 10-year performance, VOO leads with 15.77% vs 8.80% for IGF. On fees, VOO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 3.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, VOO has performed better with a 15.77% return vs 8.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VOO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IGF.
IGF has the higher dividend yield at 2.91%, compared with 1.04% for VOO.
IGF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while VOO is S&P 500. IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), while VOO tracks S&P 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IGF and 0.03% for VOO.
VOO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.17 vs 1.76), 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 VOO
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