INFR vs. MGNR
INFR (ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF) and MGNR (American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. INFR is passively managed, while MGNR is actively managed. Over the past year, INFR returned 6.42% vs 79.57% for MGNR. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for MGNR.
Performance
INFR vs. MGNR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INFR achieves a 1.41% return, which is significantly lower than MGNR's 28.15% return.
INFR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 1.41%
- 6M
- 1.36%
- 1Y
- 6.42%
- 3Y*
- 5.55%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MGNR
- 1D
- 2.10%
- 1M
- 4.78%
- YTD
- 28.15%
- 6M
- 31.78%
- 1Y
- 79.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INFR vs. MGNR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF | 1.41% | 24.00% | -1.56% |
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF | 28.15% | 50.57% | 22.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between INFR and MGNR is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2024 | 0.31 |
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
INFR vs. MGNR — Risk / Return Rank
INFR
MGNR
INFR vs. MGNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR). 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 | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.75 | 3.49 | -2.73 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.11 | 4.00 | -2.89 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.57 | -0.40 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.98 | 6.75 | -4.77 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.26 | 27.40 | -21.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| INFR | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.75 | 3.49 | -2.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 1.81 | -1.36 |
Drawdowns
INFR vs. MGNR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INFR drawdown since its inception was -19.28%, smaller than the maximum MGNR drawdown of -22.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INFR and MGNR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INFR | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.28% | -22.06% | +2.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.43% | -12.38% | +5.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.55% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.70% | 0.00% | -0.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.93% | -3.87% | -1.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.04% | 3.05% | -1.01% |
Volatility
INFR vs. MGNR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) is 0.00%, while American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF (MGNR) has a volatility of 6.33%. This indicates that INFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MGNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INFR | MGNR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | 6.33% | -6.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.86% | 17.57% | -13.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.04% | 23.04% | -14.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.27% | 25.02% | -10.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.27% | 25.02% | -10.75% |
INFR vs. MGNR - Expense Ratio Comparison
INFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than MGNR's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
INFR vs. MGNR - Dividend Comparison
INFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%, more than MGNR's 1.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF | 2.49% | 2.52% | 2.36% | 3.06% |
MGNR American Beacon GLG Natural Resources ETF | 1.05% | 1.17% | 0.79% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
INFR and MGNR have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MGNR has higher volatility (6.33%) compared to INFR (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INFR dropped -19.28% vs MGNR's -22.06%.
On 1-year performance, MGNR leads with 79.57% vs 6.42% for INFR. On fees, INFR is cheaper at 0.59% 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.
Over the 1-year period, MGNR has performed better with a 79.57% return vs 6.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
INFR is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MGNR.
INFR has the higher dividend yield at 2.49%, compared with 1.05% for MGNR.
They also come from different issuers: ClearBridge and American Beacon. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for INFR and 0.75% for MGNR.
MGNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 0.75), 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 INFR and MGNR
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