TINT vs. EIPX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

TINT (ProShares Smart Materials ETF) and EIPX (FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF) are both Energy Equities funds. TINT is passively managed, while EIPX is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, TINT returned 10.44%/yr vs 21.58%/yr for EIPX. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TINT charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for EIPX.

Performance

TINT vs. EIPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Smart Materials ETF (TINT) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TINT achieves a 25.11% return, which is significantly higher than EIPX's 22.72% return.

TINT

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 2.42%
• YTD: 25.11%
• 6M: 25.92%
• 1Y: 43.43%
• 3Y*: 10.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EIPX

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: -1.66%
• YTD: 22.72%
• 6M: 19.76%
• 1Y: 32.68%
• 3Y*: 21.58%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TINT vs. EIPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
TINT ProShares Smart Materials ETF	25.11%	16.13%	-13.37%	20.04%	8.04%
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	22.72%	11.44%	19.11%	10.74%	0.56%

Correlation

The correlation between TINT and EIPX is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2022	0.46

Over the past year, the correlation between TINT and EIPX has dropped to 0.14 - well below their long-term average of 0.46, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

TINT vs. EIPX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TINT	EIPX
Basic Materials	22.9%	-
Technology	10.9%	0.2%
Industrials	4.3%	4.2%
Financial Services	3.6%	-
Healthcare	2.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	69.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	26.1%

Return for Risk

TINT vs. EIPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

TINT

TINT Risk / Return Rank: 53
TINT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
TINT Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
TINT Omega Ratio Rank: 53
TINT Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
TINT Martin Ratio Rank: 53

EIPX

EIPX Risk / Return Rank: 90
EIPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EIPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EIPX Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EIPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
EIPX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

TINT vs. EIPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Smart Materials ETF (TINT) and FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX). 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.

	TINT	EIPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	2.97	-1.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.53	4.19	-1.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.51	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.49	7.97	-5.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.02	22.02	-13.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TINT vs. EIPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TINT Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is lower than the EIPX Sharpe Ratio of 2.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TINT and EIPX, 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

	TINT	EIPX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.84	2.97	-1.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.09	1.21	-1.12

Drawdowns

TINT vs. EIPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TINT drawdown since its inception was -41.36%, which is greater than EIPX's maximum drawdown of -15.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TINT and EIPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	TINT	EIPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.36%	-15.43%	-25.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.53%	-4.12%	-13.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.42%	-15.43%	-14.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.12%	-1.98%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.12%	-2.27%	-18.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.83%	1.49%	+3.34%

Volatility

TINT vs. EIPX - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Smart Materials ETF (TINT) has a higher volatility of 8.78% compared to FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF (EIPX) at 4.07%. This indicates that TINT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EIPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TINT	EIPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.78%	4.07%	+4.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.90%	8.44%	+11.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.73%	11.14%	+12.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.45%	15.05%	+8.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.45%	15.05%	+8.40%

TINT vs. EIPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

TINT has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than EIPX's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

TINT vs. EIPX - Dividend Comparison

TINT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, less than EIPX's 2.66% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EIPX FT Energy Income Partners Strategy ETF	2.66%	3.23%	3.27%	3.48%	0.34%
TINT ProShares Smart Materials ETF	0.98%	1.27%	1.47%	0.99%	1.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TINT and EIPX in my portfolio?

TINT and EIPX have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TINT or EIPX?

TINT has higher volatility (8.78%) compared to EIPX (4.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TINT dropped -41.36% vs EIPX's -15.43%.

Which ETF is better, TINT or EIPX?

On 3-year performance, EIPX leads with 21.58% vs 10.44% for TINT. On fees, TINT is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, EIPX has been the lower-risk option at 4.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TINT or EIPX?

Over the 3-year period, EIPX has performed better with a 21.58% return vs 10.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TINT or EIPX?

TINT is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for EIPX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TINT or EIPX?

EIPX has the higher dividend yield at 2.66%, compared with 0.98% for TINT.

What is the main difference between TINT and EIPX?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for TINT and 0.95% for EIPX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EIPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 1.84), 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.