OIH vs. BKGI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

OIH (VanEck Oil Services ETF) and BKGI (Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. OIH is passively managed, while BKGI is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, OIH returned 14.83%/yr vs 22.11%/yr for BKGI. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. OIH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for BKGI.

Performance

OIH vs. BKGI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Oil Services ETF (OIH) and Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF (BKGI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OIH achieves a 35.03% return, which is significantly higher than BKGI's 12.30% return.

OIH

• 1D: -1.13%
• 1M: -13.39%
• YTD: 35.03%
• 6M: 35.52%
• 1Y: 68.64%
• 3Y*: 14.83%
• 5Y*: 12.26%
• 10Y*: -2.32%

BKGI

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -2.97%
• YTD: 12.30%
• 6M: 12.73%
• 1Y: 20.53%
• 3Y*: 22.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OIH vs. BKGI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
OIH VanEck Oil Services ETF	35.03%	6.81%	-10.53%	3.20%	5.22%
BKGI Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF	12.30%	37.53%	12.35%	9.72%	8.54%

Correlation

The correlation between OIH and BKGI is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2022	0.36

The correlation between OIH and BKGI shifts across timeframes, from 0.25 (1 year) to 0.36 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

OIH vs. BKGI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OIH	BKGI
Energy	97.6%	20.6%
Utilities	1.9%	46.8%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	2.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	11.8%
Real Estate	-	18.1%
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

OIH vs. BKGI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

OIH

OIH Risk / Return Rank: 75
OIH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
OIH Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
OIH Omega Ratio Rank: 63
OIH Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
OIH Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BKGI

BKGI Risk / Return Rank: 59
BKGI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
BKGI Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BKGI Omega Ratio Rank: 55
BKGI Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
BKGI Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

OIH vs. BKGI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Oil Services ETF (OIH) and Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF (BKGI). 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.

	OIH	BKGI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	1.78	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.97	2.47	+0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.32	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.51	3.35	+1.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.04	10.49	+5.55

OIH vs. BKGI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OIH Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the BKGI Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OIH and BKGI, 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

OIH vs. BKGI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OIH drawdown since its inception was -94.45%, which is greater than BKGI's maximum drawdown of -14.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OIH and BKGI.

Drawdown Indicators

	OIH	BKGI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-94.45%	-14.79%	-79.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.29%	-6.16%	-9.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.80%	-14.16%	-29.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.80%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-65.76%	-3.05%	-62.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.87%	-2.56%	-46.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.29%	1.96%	+2.33%

Volatility

OIH vs. BKGI - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Oil Services ETF (OIH) has a higher volatility of 10.14% compared to Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF (BKGI) at 3.29%. This indicates that OIH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BKGI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OIH	BKGI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.14%	3.29%	+6.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.14%	9.27%	+11.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	30.39%	11.64%	+18.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.79%	14.02%	+22.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	42.38%	14.02%	+28.36%

OIH vs. BKGI - Expense Ratio Comparison

OIH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BKGI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

OIH vs. BKGI - Dividend Comparison

OIH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%, less than BKGI's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BKGI Bny Mellon Global Infrastructure Income ETF	2.69%	2.65%	4.55%	4.55%	0.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
OIH VanEck Oil Services ETF	1.27%	1.71%	2.01%	1.36%	0.95%	0.98%	1.23%	2.10%	2.13%	2.60%	1.40%	2.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OIH and BKGI in my portfolio?

OIH and BKGI have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OIH or BKGI?

OIH has higher volatility (10.14%) compared to BKGI (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OIH dropped -94.45% vs BKGI's -14.79%.

Which ETF is better, OIH or BKGI?

On 3-year performance, BKGI leads with 22.11% vs 14.83% for OIH. On fees, OIH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BKGI has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OIH or BKGI?

Over the 3-year period, BKGI has performed better with a 22.11% return vs 14.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OIH or BKGI?

OIH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BKGI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OIH or BKGI?

BKGI has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 1.27% for OIH.

What is the main difference between OIH and BKGI?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for OIH and 0.65% for BKGI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OIH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.78), 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.