Screener
BILT vs IFRA
iShares Infrastructure Active ETF vs iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF
Key differences
- IFRA costs 0.30% less per year.
- IFRA is significantly larger than BILT — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- BILT follows a active selection strategy; IFRA uses index tracking.
- IFRA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BILT | IFRA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.60% | 0.30% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $26M | $4.1B |
| Since | 2025 | 2018 |
| Dividend yield | — | 1.56% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +30.8% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +20.6% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +13.0% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 1.00 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 14.79% |
| Max drawdown | -5.38% | -41.06% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BILT and IFRA
Explore further