INFR vs. USNG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

INFR (ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF) and USNG (Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. INFR is passively managed, while USNG is actively managed. Over the past year, INFR returned 5.89% vs 47.43% for USNG. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.59% expense ratio.

Performance

INFR vs. USNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). 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 USNG's 36.17% return.

INFR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 1.56%
• 1Y: 5.89%
• 3Y*: 5.42%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

USNG

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: -0.64%
• YTD: 36.17%
• 6M: 36.35%
• 1Y: 47.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INFR vs. USNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	1.41%	7.22%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	36.17%	10.51%

Correlation

The correlation between INFR and USNG is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2025	0.11

INFR vs. USNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	INFR	USNG
Utilities	68.5%	4.7%
Industrials	27.5%	12.8%
Real Estate	4.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	1.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	79.2%
Financial Services	-	1.8%
Healthcare	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

INFR vs. USNG — 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.

USNG

USNG Risk / Return Rank: 91
USNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
USNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
USNG Omega Ratio Rank: 86
USNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
USNG Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. USNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) and Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG). 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	USNG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.93	2.86	-1.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	3.85	-2.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.48	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.28	6.99	-5.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.97	21.05	-17.08

INFR vs. USNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INFR Sharpe Ratio is 0.93, which is lower than the USNG Sharpe Ratio of 2.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INFR and USNG, 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. USNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INFR drawdown since its inception was -19.28%, which is greater than USNG's maximum drawdown of -6.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INFR and USNG.

Drawdown Indicators

	INFR	USNG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.28%	-6.82%	-12.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.43%	-6.82%	+0.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.48%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-0.64%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.91%	-1.52%	-3.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.26%	-0.22%

Volatility

INFR vs. USNG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) is 0.00%, while Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF (USNG) has a volatility of 6.29%. This indicates that INFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than USNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	INFR	USNG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.00%	6.29%	-6.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.73%	12.47%	-8.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.90%	16.68%	-7.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.24%	16.61%	-2.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.24%	16.61%	-2.37%

INFR vs. USNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

INFR vs. USNG - Dividend Comparison

INFR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while USNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	1.71%	2.52%	2.36%	3.06%
USNG Amplify Samsung U.S. Natural Gas Infrastructure ETF	1.09%	1.10%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INFR and USNG in my portfolio?

INFR and USNG have a correlation of 0.13, 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 USNG?

USNG has higher volatility (6.29%) compared to INFR (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INFR dropped -19.28% vs USNG's -6.82%.

Which ETF is better, INFR or USNG?

On 1-year performance, USNG leads with 47.43% vs 5.89% 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 USNG?

Over the 1-year period, USNG has performed better with a 47.43% return vs 5.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INFR or USNG?

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

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

INFR has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 1.09% for USNG.

What is the main difference between INFR and USNG?

They also come from different issuers: ClearBridge and Amplify.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USNG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 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.