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