MNZL vs. ENFR
MNZL (Manzil Russell Halal USA Broad Market ETF) and ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MNZL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell IdealRatings Manzil Halal USA Broad Market Index, while ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. MNZL charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ENFR.
Performance
MNZL vs. ENFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MNZL achieves a 18.40% return, which is significantly lower than ENFR's 23.07% return.
MNZL
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 3.76%
- YTD
- 18.40%
- 6M
- 17.23%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ENFR
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- -5.94%
- YTD
- 23.07%
- 6M
- 24.76%
- 1Y
- 24.84%
- 3Y*
- 28.26%
- 5Y*
- 19.69%
- 10Y*
- 11.81%
MNZL vs. ENFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MNZL Manzil Russell Halal USA Broad Market ETF | 18.40% | 3.37% |
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 23.07% | 1.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between MNZL and ENFR is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2025 | -0.19 |
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
MNZL vs. ENFR — Risk / Return Rank
MNZL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ENFR
MNZL vs. ENFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Manzil Russell Halal USA Broad Market ETF (MNZL) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). 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.
| MNZL | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.29 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.89 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 7.40 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MNZL vs. ENFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MNZL drawdown since its inception was -9.66%, smaller than the maximum ENFR drawdown of -68.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNZL and ENFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MNZL | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.66% | -68.28% | +58.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.64% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.58% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -62.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.87% | -6.12% | +5.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.83% | -15.94% | +14.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.36% | — |
Volatility
MNZL vs. ENFR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MNZL | ENFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.42% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.57% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.76% | 14.82% | +1.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.76% | 19.24% | -2.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.76% | 24.68% | -7.92% |
MNZL vs. ENFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MNZL has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than ENFR's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
MNZL vs. ENFR - Dividend Comparison
MNZL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%, less than ENFR's 4.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF | 4.08% | 4.77% | 4.41% | 5.48% | 5.23% | 7.86% | 7.57% | 5.81% | 3.98% | 2.98% | 3.31% | 3.34% |
MNZL Manzil Russell Halal USA Broad Market ETF | 0.03% | 0.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MNZL and ENFR have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ENFR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ENFR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for MNZL.
ENFR has the higher dividend yield at 4.08%, compared with 0.03% for MNZL.
MNZL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ENFR is Energy Equities. MNZL tracks Russell IdealRatings Manzil Halal USA Broad Market Index, while ENFR tracks Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Manzil and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for MNZL and 0.35% for ENFR.
Find the right allocation for MNZL and ENFR
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