MVAL vs. IGF
MVAL (VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat Value ETF) and IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MVAL is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Broad Value Wide Moat Focus Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MVAL returned 13.96% vs 15.30% for IGF. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MVAL charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IGF.
Performance
MVAL vs. IGF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MVAL achieves a -2.29% return, which is significantly lower than IGF's 8.05% return.
MVAL
- 1D
- -0.54%
- 1M
- -0.15%
- YTD
- -2.29%
- 6M
- -2.26%
- 1Y
- 13.96%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IGF
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- -1.85%
- YTD
- 8.05%
- 6M
- 7.91%
- 1Y
- 15.30%
- 3Y*
- 15.91%
- 5Y*
- 10.15%
- 10Y*
- 8.29%
MVAL vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MVAL VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat Value ETF | -2.29% | 14.17% | 6.10% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 8.05% | 21.31% | 13.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between MVAL and IGF is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2024 | 0.46 |
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
MVAL vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank
MVAL
IGF
MVAL vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat Value ETF (MVAL) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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.
| MVAL | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.26 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.15 | 2.62 | -1.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.87 | 8.05 | -5.19 |
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
| MVAL | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.02 | 1.47 | -0.44 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.73 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 0.24 | +0.29 |
Drawdowns
MVAL vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MVAL drawdown since its inception was -19.56%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVAL and IGF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MVAL | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.56% | -58.33% | +38.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.16% | -5.87% | -6.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.28% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.11% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.57% | -4.43% | -6.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -11.87% | +8.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.88% | 1.90% | +2.98% |
Volatility
MVAL vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat Value ETF (MVAL) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) have volatilities of 3.59% and 3.68%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MVAL | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.59% | 3.68% | -0.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.59% | 8.59% | +1.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.73% | 10.49% | +3.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.40% | 13.99% | +1.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.40% | 16.83% | -1.43% |
MVAL vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison
MVAL has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
MVAL vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison
MVAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, less than IGF's 2.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.98% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
MVAL VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat Value ETF | 1.79% | 1.75% | 0.97% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MVAL and IGF have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IGF has higher volatility (3.68%) compared to MVAL (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MVAL dropped -19.56% vs IGF's -58.33%.
On 1-year performance, IGF leads with 15.30% vs 13.96% for MVAL. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IGF has performed better with a 15.30% return vs 13.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MVAL.
IGF has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 1.79% for MVAL.
MVAL is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while IGF is Industrials Equities. MVAL tracks Morningstar US Broad Value Wide Moat Focus Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MVAL and 0.39% for IGF.
IGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.47 vs 1.02), 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 MVAL and IGF
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