INFR vs. BILD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

INFR (ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF) and BILD (Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. INFR is passively managed, while BILD is actively managed. Over the past year, INFR returned 7.79% vs 14.53% for BILD. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. INFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for BILD.

Performance

INFR vs. BILD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INFR achieves a 1.41% return, which is significantly lower than BILD's 7.24% return.

INFR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 0.97%
• 1Y: 7.79%
• 3Y*: 5.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BILD

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: -2.00%
• YTD: 7.24%
• 6M: 6.70%
• 1Y: 14.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INFR vs. BILD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	1.41%	24.00%	-6.23%	4.58%
BILD Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF	7.24%	21.08%	-2.68%	3.97%

Correlation

The correlation between INFR and BILD is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2023	0.81

Over the past year, the correlation between INFR and BILD has dropped to 0.53 - well below their long-term average of 0.81, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

INFR vs. BILD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	INFR	BILD
Utilities	68.5%	54.2%
Industrials	27.5%	20.4%
Real Estate	4.1%	5.5%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	1.6%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	18.4%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

INFR vs. BILD — Risk / Return Rank

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

INFR

INFR Risk / Return Rank: 27
INFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
INFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
INFR Omega Ratio Rank: 31
INFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
INFR Martin Ratio Rank: 28

BILD

BILD Risk / Return Rank: 40
BILD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
BILD Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
BILD Omega Ratio Rank: 37
BILD Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
BILD Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

INFR vs. BILD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD). 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.

	INFR	BILD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.93	1.35	-0.43
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	1.86	-0.50
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.24	-0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.28	2.41	-1.13
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.97	6.80	-2.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

INFR vs. BILD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INFR Sharpe Ratio is 0.93, which is lower than the BILD Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INFR and BILD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	INFR	BILD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93	1.35	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	0.88	-0.42

Drawdowns

INFR vs. BILD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INFR drawdown since its inception was -19.28%, which is greater than BILD's maximum drawdown of -14.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INFR and BILD.

Drawdown Indicators

	INFR	BILD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.28%	-14.78%	-4.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.43%	-6.05%	-0.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.55%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-5.05%	+4.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.93%	-3.70%	-1.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.14%	-0.10%

Volatility

INFR vs. BILD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) is 0.00%, while Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF (BILD) has a volatility of 4.05%. This indicates that INFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BILD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INFR	BILD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.00%	4.05%	-4.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.79%	8.88%	-5.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.00%	10.78%	-1.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.26%	13.23%	+1.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.26%	13.23%	+1.03%

INFR vs. BILD - Expense Ratio Comparison

INFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than BILD's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

INFR vs. BILD - Dividend Comparison

INFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%, less than BILD's 2.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BILD Macquarie Global Listed Infrastructure ETF	2.86%	3.05%	5.53%	0.52%
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	2.49%	2.52%	2.36%	3.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INFR and BILD in my portfolio?

INFR and BILD have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, INFR or BILD?

BILD has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to INFR (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INFR dropped -19.28% vs BILD's -14.78%.

Which ETF is better, INFR or BILD?

On 1-year performance, BILD leads with 14.53% vs 7.79% for INFR. On fees, BILD is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, INFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INFR or BILD?

Over the 1-year period, BILD has performed better with a 14.53% return vs 7.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INFR or BILD?

BILD is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for INFR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INFR or BILD?

BILD has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 2.49% for INFR.

What is the main difference between INFR and BILD?

They also come from different issuers: ClearBridge and Macquarie. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for INFR and 0.49% for BILD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BILD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs 0.93), 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.