IPAV vs. EMLP

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IPAV (Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF) and EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. IPAV is passively managed, while EMLP is actively managed. Over the past year, IPAV returned 18.18% vs 19.09% for EMLP. Their 0.21 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IPAV charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for EMLP.

Performance

IPAV vs. EMLP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF (IPAV) and First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAV achieves a 6.95% return, which is significantly lower than EMLP's 17.75% return.

IPAV

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: -1.47%
• 6M: 0.92%
• YTD: 6.95%
• 1Y: 18.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.28%

EMLP

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: 0.62%
• 6M: 11.20%
• YTD: 17.75%
• 1Y: 19.09%
• 3Y*: 20.43%
• 5Y*: 16.56%
• 10Y*: 10.12%
• ALL TIME*: 9.68%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	$12.88M	$10.50M	$12.16M
IPAV Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF	$22.25K	$22.11K	$47.05K

IPAV vs. EMLP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IPAV Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF	6.95%	29.77%	-6.87%
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	17.75%	9.67%	10.93%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAV and EMLP is 0.04, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2024	0.21

The correlation between IPAV and EMLP shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IPAV vs. EMLP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IPAV	EMLP
Industrials	48.8%	8.6%
Basic Materials	43.7%	1.7%
Real Estate	3.0%	-
Communication Services	2.3%	-
Energy	1.2%	25.9%
Utilities	0.8%	55.2%
Consumer Cyclical	0.2%	-
Technology	0.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-

Return for Risk

IPAV vs. EMLP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IPAV

IPAV Risk / Return Rank: 37
IPAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
IPAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
IPAV Omega Ratio Rank: 39
IPAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
IPAV Martin Ratio Rank: 34

EMLP

EMLP Risk / Return Rank: 80
EMLP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
EMLP Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
EMLP Omega Ratio Rank: 73
EMLP Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
EMLP Martin Ratio Rank: 81

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IPAV vs. EMLP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF (IPAV) and First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP). 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.

	IPAV	EMLP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	1.78	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.50	2.61	-1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.30	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.21	3.72	-2.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.32	10.54	-7.22

IPAV vs. EMLP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAV Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the EMLP Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAV and EMLP, 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

IPAV vs. EMLP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAV drawdown since its inception was -14.59%, smaller than the maximum EMLP drawdown of -43.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAV and EMLP.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPAV	EMLP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.59%	-43.61%	+29.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.59%	-4.94%	-9.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.47%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.59%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-43.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.75%	-1.94%	-8.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.97%	-5.71%	+1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.32%	1.74%	+3.58%

Volatility

IPAV vs. EMLP - Volatility Comparison

Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF (IPAV) has a higher volatility of 5.18% compared to First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) at 3.87%. This indicates that IPAV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMLP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IPAV	EMLP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.18%	3.87%	+1.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.26%	8.48%	+7.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.16%	10.36%	+7.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.95%	14.49%	+3.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.95%	17.67%	+0.28%

IPAV vs. EMLP - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLP's 0.96% expense ratio.

Dividends

IPAV vs. EMLP - Dividend Comparison

IPAV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than EMLP's 2.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund	2.76%	3.18%	3.19%	3.92%	3.15%	3.29%	4.70%	3.71%	4.71%	3.80%	3.62%	4.63%
IPAV Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF	1.52%	1.29%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IPAV and EMLP in my portfolio?

IPAV and EMLP have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPAV or EMLP?

IPAV has higher volatility (5.18%) compared to EMLP (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAV dropped -14.59% vs EMLP's -43.61%.

Which ETF is better, IPAV or EMLP?

On 1-year performance, EMLP leads with 19.09% vs 18.18% for IPAV. On fees, IPAV is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, EMLP has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPAV or EMLP?

Over the 1-year period, EMLP has performed better with a 19.09% return vs 18.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPAV or EMLP?

IPAV is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IPAV or EMLP?

EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 1.52% for IPAV.

What is the main difference between IPAV and EMLP?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for IPAV and 0.96% for EMLP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMLP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 0.97), 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.