INFR vs. MLPI
INFR (ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF) and MLPI (Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. INFR is passively managed, while MLPI is actively managed. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. INFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for MLPI.
Performance
INFR vs. MLPI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, INFR achieves a 1.41% return, which is significantly lower than MLPI's 17.58% return.
INFR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 1.41%
- 6M
- 0.97%
- 1Y
- 7.79%
- 3Y*
- 5.55%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MLPI
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -3.13%
- YTD
- 17.58%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INFR vs. MLPI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF | 1.41% | 1.01% |
MLPI Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 17.58% | 0.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between INFR and MLPI is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2025 | 0.08 |
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. MLPI — Risk / Return Rank
INFR
MLPI
INFR vs. MLPI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF (MLPI). 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 | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.28 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.97 | — | — |
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 | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.93 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 3.49 | -3.03 |
Drawdowns
INFR vs. MLPI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum INFR drawdown since its inception was -19.28%, which is greater than MLPI's maximum drawdown of -5.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INFR and MLPI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| INFR | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.28% | -5.38% | -13.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.43% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.55% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.70% | -3.84% | +3.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.93% | -1.27% | -3.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.04% | — | — |
Volatility
INFR vs. MLPI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| INFR | MLPI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.79% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.00% | 13.05% | -4.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.26% | 13.05% | +1.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.26% | 13.05% | +1.21% |
INFR vs. MLPI - Expense Ratio Comparison
INFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than MLPI's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
INFR vs. MLPI - Dividend Comparison
INFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%, less than MLPI's 6.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF | 2.49% | 2.52% | 2.36% | 3.06% |
MLPI Neos MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF | 6.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
INFR and MLPI have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, INFR is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
INFR is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for MLPI.
MLPI has the higher dividend yield at 6.04%, compared with 2.49% for INFR.
They also come from different issuers: ClearBridge and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for INFR and 0.68% for MLPI.
Find the right allocation for INFR and MLPI
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