INFR vs. BLDG

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

INFR (ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF) and BLDG (Cambria Global Real Estate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - INFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the RARE Global Infrastructure Index, while BLDG is a REIT fund actively managed by Cambria. INFR is passively managed, while BLDG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, INFR returned 5.42%/yr vs 10.36%/yr for BLDG. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.59% expense ratio.

Performance

INFR vs. BLDG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). 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 BLDG's 11.81% return.

INFR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 2.70%
• 1Y: 7.18%
• 3Y*: 5.42%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BLDG

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 4.13%
• YTD: 11.81%
• 6M: 12.26%
• 1Y: 14.51%
• 3Y*: 10.36%
• 5Y*: 2.80%
• 10Y*: —

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

INFR vs. BLDG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	1.41%	24.00%	-6.23%	5.20%	-0.19%
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	11.81%	4.26%	8.18%	1.76%	-0.41%

Correlation

The correlation between INFR and BLDG is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2022	0.56

The correlation between INFR and BLDG shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

INFR vs. BLDG — Risk / Return Rank

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

INFR

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BLDG

BLDG Risk / Return Rank: 34
BLDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
BLDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
BLDG Omega Ratio Rank: 33
BLDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
BLDG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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. BLDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). 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.

	INFR	BLDG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.93	1.17	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	1.68	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.20	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.28	1.30	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.97	4.59	-0.62

INFR vs. BLDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INFR Sharpe Ratio is 0.93, which is comparable to the BLDG Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INFR and BLDG, 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

INFR vs. BLDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INFR drawdown since its inception was -19.28%, smaller than the maximum BLDG drawdown of -27.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INFR and BLDG.

Drawdown Indicators

	INFR	BLDG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.28%	-27.25%	+7.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.43%	-10.08%	+3.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.55%	-18.57%	+0.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	0.00%	-0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.91%	-9.18%	+4.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.86%	-0.82%

Volatility

INFR vs. BLDG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) is 0.00%, while Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) has a volatility of 3.71%. This indicates that INFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BLDG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INFR	BLDG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.00%	3.71%	-3.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.73%	8.38%	-4.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.90%	11.20%	-2.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.24%	15.27%	-1.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.24%	15.52%	-1.28%

INFR vs. BLDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both INFR and BLDG have an expense ratio of 0.59%.

Dividends

INFR vs. BLDG - Dividend Comparison

INFR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BLDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.42%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	5.42%	7.46%	7.97%	4.99%	3.99%	10.40%	0.59%
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	2.49%	2.52%	2.36%	3.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INFR and BLDG in my portfolio?

INFR and BLDG have a correlation of 0.37, 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 BLDG?

BLDG has higher volatility (3.71%) compared to INFR (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INFR dropped -19.28% vs BLDG's -27.25%.

Which ETF is better, INFR or BLDG?

On 3-year performance, BLDG leads with 10.36% vs 5.42% for INFR. Both ETFs have the same 0.59% expense ratio. 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 BLDG?

Over the 3-year period, BLDG has performed better with a 10.36% return vs 5.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INFR or BLDG?

INFR and BLDG have the same expense ratio: 0.59% per year.

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

BLDG has the higher dividend yield at 5.42%, compared with 2.49% for INFR.

What is the main difference between INFR and BLDG?

INFR is categorized as Energy Equities, while BLDG is REIT. They also come from different issuers: ClearBridge and Cambria.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 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.