PIPE vs. FCAL

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

PIPE (Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) and FCAL (First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PIPE is a Infrastructure Equities fund actively managed by Invesco, while FCAL is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PIPE returned 30.59% vs 5.06% for FCAL. Their -0.11 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. PIPE charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FCAL.

Performance

PIPE vs. FCAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) and First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PIPE achieves a 28.11% return, which is significantly higher than FCAL's 0.34% return.

PIPE

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: 2.22%
• 6M: 20.40%
• YTD: 28.11%
• 1Y: 30.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.77%

FCAL

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -2.20%
• 6M: -0.57%
• YTD: 0.34%
• 1Y: 5.06%
• 3Y*: 3.05%
• 5Y*: 0.17%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.39%

*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)
FCAL First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF	$990.65K	$776.41K	$953.25K
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	$149.15K	$94.70K	$92.96K

PIPE vs. FCAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	28.11%	0.14%
FCAL First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF	0.34%	3.01%

Correlation

The correlation between PIPE and FCAL is -0.18, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	-0.11

Return for Risk

PIPE vs. FCAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PIPE

PIPE Risk / Return Rank: 81
PIPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
PIPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
PIPE Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PIPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
PIPE Martin Ratio Rank: 74

FCAL

FCAL Risk / Return Rank: 68
FCAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
FCAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
FCAL Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FCAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
FCAL Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

PIPE vs. FCAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) and First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL). 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.

	PIPE	FCAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	1.81	+0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.80	2.52	+0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.39	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.19	1.97	+2.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.00	6.67	+3.34

PIPE vs. FCAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PIPE Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the FCAL Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PIPE and FCAL, 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

PIPE vs. FCAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PIPE drawdown since its inception was -15.69%, which is greater than FCAL's maximum drawdown of -14.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PIPE and FCAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PIPE	FCAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.69%	-14.81%	-0.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.33%	-2.57%	-4.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.28%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.77%	-2.20%	-1.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.94%	-3.30%	-0.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.07%	0.76%	+2.31%

Volatility

PIPE vs. FCAL - Volatility Comparison

Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) has a higher volatility of 5.57% compared to First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF (FCAL) at 1.00%. This indicates that PIPE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PIPE	FCAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.57%	1.00%	+4.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.06%	2.33%	+9.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.95%	2.82%	+12.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.62%	4.26%	+14.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.62%	5.22%	+13.40%

PIPE vs. FCAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PIPE has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than FCAL's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PIPE vs. FCAL - Dividend Comparison

PIPE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.75%, more than FCAL's 3.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCAL First Trust California Municipal High Income ETF	3.44%	3.22%	2.99%	2.74%	2.38%	2.03%	2.11%	2.68%	2.99%	1.30%
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	3.75%	3.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PIPE and FCAL in my portfolio?

PIPE and FCAL have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PIPE or FCAL?

PIPE has higher volatility (5.57%) compared to FCAL (1.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PIPE dropped -15.69% vs FCAL's -14.81%.

Which ETF is better, PIPE or FCAL?

On 1-year performance, PIPE leads with 30.59% vs 5.06% for FCAL. On fees, FCAL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FCAL has been the lower-risk option at 1.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PIPE or FCAL?

Over the 1-year period, PIPE has performed better with a 30.59% return vs 5.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PIPE or FCAL?

FCAL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIPE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PIPE or FCAL?

PIPE has the higher dividend yield at 3.75%, compared with 3.44% for FCAL.

What is the main difference between PIPE and FCAL?

PIPE is categorized as Infrastructure Equities, while FCAL is Municipal Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PIPE and 0.50% for FCAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIPE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.81), 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.