SETM vs. INFR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SETM (Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF) and INFR (ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF) are both Energy Equities funds - SETM tracks the Nasdaq Sprott Energy Transition Materials Select Index - AUD - Benchmark TR Gross while INFR tracks the RARE Global Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SETM returned 30.90%/yr vs 5.55%/yr for INFR. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SETM charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for INFR.

Performance

SETM vs. INFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM) and ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SETM achieves a 27.22% return, which is significantly higher than INFR's 1.41% return.

SETM

• 1D: -4.09%
• 1M: 2.39%
• YTD: 27.22%
• 6M: 33.66%
• 1Y: 144.21%
• 3Y*: 30.90%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

INFR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 0.97%
• 1Y: 7.79%
• 3Y*: 5.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SETM vs. INFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SETM Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF	27.22%	95.27%	-13.24%	-11.03%
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	1.41%	24.00%	-6.23%	-0.30%

Correlation

The correlation between SETM and INFR is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.13
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2023	0.29

The correlation between SETM and INFR shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (1 year) to 0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SETM vs. INFR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SETM	INFR
Basic Materials	73.2%	-
Energy	25.8%	-
Industrials	0.9%	27.5%
Technology	0.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.1%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	4.1%
Utilities	-	68.5%

Return for Risk

SETM vs. INFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

SETM

SETM Risk / Return Rank: 82
SETM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
SETM Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
SETM Omega Ratio Rank: 72
SETM Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
SETM Martin Ratio Rank: 84

INFR

INFR Risk / Return Rank: 27
INFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
INFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
INFR Omega Ratio Rank: 31
INFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
INFR Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

SETM vs. INFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM) and ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR). 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.

	SETM	INFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.25	0.93	+2.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	1.36	+1.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.21	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.61	1.28	+4.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.42	3.97	+13.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SETM vs. INFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SETM Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is higher than the INFR Sharpe Ratio of 0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SETM and INFR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SETM	INFR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.25	0.93	+2.32
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.46	+0.14

Drawdowns

SETM vs. INFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SETM drawdown since its inception was -42.81%, which is greater than INFR's maximum drawdown of -19.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SETM and INFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	SETM	INFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.81%	-19.28%	-23.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.85%	-6.43%	-19.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-42.81%	-18.55%	-24.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.30%	-0.70%	-6.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.26%	-4.93%	-9.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.31%	2.04%	+6.27%

Volatility

SETM vs. INFR - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF (SETM) has a higher volatility of 13.58% compared to ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF (INFR) at 0.00%. This indicates that SETM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SETM	INFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.58%	0.00%	+13.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.49%	3.79%	+30.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.71%	9.00%	+35.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.57%	14.26%	+22.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.57%	14.26%	+22.31%

SETM vs. INFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

SETM has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than INFR's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

SETM vs. INFR - Dividend Comparison

SETM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than INFR's 2.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
INFR ClearBridge Sustainable Infrastructure ETF	2.49%	2.52%	2.36%	3.06%
SETM Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF	1.23%	1.56%	2.07%	2.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SETM and INFR in my portfolio?

SETM and INFR have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SETM or INFR?

SETM has higher volatility (13.58%) compared to INFR (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SETM dropped -42.81% vs INFR's -19.28%.

Which ETF is better, SETM or INFR?

On 3-year performance, SETM leads with 30.90% vs 5.55% for INFR. On fees, INFR is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, INFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SETM or INFR?

Over the 3-year period, SETM has performed better with a 30.90% return vs 5.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SETM or INFR?

INFR is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SETM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SETM or INFR?

INFR has the higher dividend yield at 2.49%, compared with 1.23% for SETM.

What is the main difference between SETM and INFR?

SETM tracks Nasdaq Sprott Energy Transition Materials Select Index - AUD - Benchmark TR Gross, while INFR tracks RARE Global Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and ClearBridge. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for SETM and 0.59% for INFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SETM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.25 vs 0.93), 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.