PIPE vs. IEZ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PIPE (Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) and IEZ (iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. PIPE is actively managed, while IEZ is passively managed. Over the past year, PIPE returned 27.93% vs 58.91% for IEZ. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PIPE charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for IEZ.

Performance

PIPE vs. IEZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) and iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF (IEZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PIPE achieves a 25.20% return, which is significantly lower than IEZ's 34.28% return.

PIPE

• 1D: 1.02%
• 1M: -5.39%
• YTD: 25.20%
• 6M: 26.77%
• 1Y: 27.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IEZ

• 1D: 1.05%
• 1M: -12.36%
• YTD: 34.28%
• 6M: 34.61%
• 1Y: 58.91%
• 3Y*: 15.98%
• 5Y*: 13.33%
• 10Y*: -1.39%

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

PIPE vs. IEZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	25.20%	0.14%
IEZ iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF	34.28%	1.56%

Correlation

The correlation between PIPE and IEZ is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.53

The correlation between PIPE and IEZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

PIPE vs. IEZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PIPE	IEZ
Energy	96.7%	99.3%
Utilities	2.0%	1.0%
Financial Services	1.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	0.7%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

PIPE vs. IEZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PIPE

PIPE Risk / Return Rank: 61
PIPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
PIPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
PIPE Omega Ratio Rank: 55
PIPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
PIPE Martin Ratio Rank: 56

IEZ

IEZ Risk / Return Rank: 66
IEZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
IEZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
IEZ Omega Ratio Rank: 54
IEZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
IEZ Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

PIPE vs. IEZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) and iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF (IEZ). 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	IEZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	2.01	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.63	2.65	-0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.33	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.83	3.95	-0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.45	14.17	-4.72

PIPE vs. IEZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PIPE Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the IEZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PIPE and IEZ, 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. IEZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PIPE drawdown since its inception was -15.69%, smaller than the maximum IEZ drawdown of -92.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PIPE and IEZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PIPE	IEZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.69%	-92.52%	+76.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.33%	-14.97%	+7.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-40.25%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-40.25%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-88.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.68%	-55.68%	+50.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.02%	-48.26%	+44.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.96%	4.23%	-1.27%

Volatility

PIPE vs. IEZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) is 5.36%, while iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF (IEZ) has a volatility of 9.92%. This indicates that PIPE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PIPE	IEZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.36%	9.92%	-4.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.13%	20.88%	-9.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.49%	29.55%	-15.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.62%	36.32%	-17.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.62%	41.55%	-22.93%

PIPE vs. IEZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PIPE has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IEZ's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

PIPE vs. IEZ - Dividend Comparison

PIPE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.10%, more than IEZ's 1.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IEZ iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF	1.24%	1.87%	1.76%	0.97%	0.65%	1.20%	2.07%	2.28%	1.81%	3.42%	0.91%	2.40%
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.10%	3.74%	0.00%	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 PIPE and IEZ in my portfolio?

PIPE and IEZ have a correlation of 0.47, 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 IEZ?

IEZ has higher volatility (9.92%) compared to PIPE (5.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PIPE dropped -15.69% vs IEZ's -92.52%.

Which ETF is better, PIPE or IEZ?

On 1-year performance, IEZ leads with 58.91% vs 27.93% for PIPE. On fees, IEZ is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, PIPE has been the lower-risk option at 5.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PIPE or IEZ?

Over the 1-year period, IEZ has performed better with a 58.91% return vs 27.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PIPE or IEZ?

IEZ is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIPE.

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

PIPE has the higher dividend yield at 4.10%, compared with 1.24% for IEZ.

What is the main difference between PIPE and IEZ?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for PIPE and 0.42% for IEZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IEZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.94), 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.