PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
PMLP.L vs. INRG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PMLP.L (HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF) and INRG.L (iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Energy Equities funds - PMLP.L tracks the MSCI World/Energy NR USD while INRG.L tracks the S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PMLP.L returned 19.87%/yr vs 3.14%/yr for INRG.L. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PMLP.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for INRG.L.

Performance

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMLP.L achieves a 26.71% return, which is significantly lower than INRG.L's 41.94% return.

PMLP.L

1D
1.96%
1M
1.75%
YTD
26.71%
6M
26.31%
1Y
28.41%
3Y*
22.73%
5Y*
19.87%
10Y*
—

INRG.L

1D
-1.14%
1M
12.78%
YTD
41.94%
6M
40.10%
1Y
86.64%
3Y*
6.52%
5Y*
3.14%
10Y*
13.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
PMLP.L
HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF		26.71%-1.40%35.81%7.61%35.33%34.88%8.45%
INRG.L
iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		41.94%34.75%-24.39%-23.83%5.52%-23.71%90.10%

Correlation

The correlation between PMLP.L and INRG.L is -0.11, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.11

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2020

0.17

The correlation between PMLP.L and INRG.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.21 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
PMLP.L
INRG.L

Energy

100.0%
24.7%

Basic Materials

-

1.3%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

0.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

28.3%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

10.5%

Utilities

-

33.7%

Energy

PMLP.L
100.0%
INRG.L
24.7%

Basic Materials

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L
1.3%

Communication Services

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L

-

Consumer Cyclical

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L

-

Financial Services

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L

-

Healthcare

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L

-

Industrials

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L
28.3%

Real Estate

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L

-

Technology

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L
10.5%

Utilities

PMLP.L

-

INRG.L
33.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF

iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

Often compared with PMLP.L:
PMLP.L vs. AMLPPMLP.L vs. ANRJ.LPMLP.L vs. XLUP.LPMLP.L vs. PAVEPMLP.L vs. MLPAPMLP.L vs. FUQA.LPMLP.L vs. UTES
Often compared with INRG.L:
INRG.L vs. ICLNINRG.L vs. TANINRG.L vs. RENW.DEINRG.L vs. V3AB.LINRG.L vs. ACESINRG.L vs. WDNR.DEINRG.L vs. ESIH.L

Return for Risk

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
PMLP.L
PMLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank
INRG.L
INRG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
INRG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INRG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
INRG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
INRG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
INRG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) and iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L). 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.

PMLP.LINRG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.50
3.60

-2.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.03
4.57

-2.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.55

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.61

6.96

-4.35

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.58

20.85

-13.28

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMLP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is lower than the INRG.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMLP.L and INRG.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

PMLP.LINRG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.50

3.60

-2.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.02

0.13

+0.89

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.52

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.28

0.02

+1.25

Drawdowns

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMLP.L drawdown since its inception was -20.50%, smaller than the maximum INRG.L drawdown of -85.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMLP.L and INRG.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

PMLP.LINRG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.50%

-85.09%

+64.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.82%

-12.38%

+1.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.50%

-44.29%

+23.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.50%

-57.38%

+36.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-65.47%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.31%

-25.86%

+21.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.88%

-56.55%

+50.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.73%

4.14%

-0.41%

Volatility

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF (PMLP.L) is 7.40%, while iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (INRG.L) has a volatility of 9.35%. This indicates that PMLP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than INRG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

PMLP.LINRG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.40%

9.35%

-1.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.48%

17.61%

-2.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.87%

23.97%

-5.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.86%

24.78%

-4.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.34%

25.33%

-3.99%

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMLP.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than INRG.L's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMLP.L vs. INRG.L - Dividend Comparison

PMLP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.74%, more than INRG.L's 1.07% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
INRG.L
iShares Global Clean Energy UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		1.07%1.77%1.58%1.00%0.62%1.01%0.61%2.05%3.68%3.69%3.65%3.90%
PMLP.L
HANetf Alerian Midstream Energy Dividend UCITS ETF		2.74%3.31%3.37%6.48%6.12%6.57%4.17%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

PMLP.L and INRG.L have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, PMLP.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PMLP.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for INRG.L.

PMLP.L tracks MSCI World/Energy NR USD, while INRG.L tracks S&P Global Clean Energy TR USD. They also come from different issuers: HANetf and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for PMLP.L and 0.65% for INRG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMLP.L and INRG.L

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