EMO vs ENFR
ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund Inc. vs Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF
Which is better, EMO or ENFR?
Each has led over a different period.
ENFR has a lower expense ratio. EMO led over 3Y and 5Y, ENFR over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. ENFR is less concentrated, with 59.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 72.4%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EMO | ENFR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 3.37% | 0.35%Best |
| AUM | $1.2B | $547M |
| Dividend Yield | 7.97% | 4.21% |
| Holdings | 23 | 29 |
| YTD Return | +17.67% | +22.06%Best |
| 1Y Return | +26.01% | +27.30%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.41%Best | +24.01% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +24.41%Best | +18.07% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 44.9% | 24.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -97.2% | -74.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $29,804Best | $22,946 |
| Top 10 Weight | 72.4% | 59.7%Best |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | ALPS Advisors |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Mid Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 13, 2011 | Oct 31, 2013 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 1, 2013 to Oct 15, 2026 (13 years).
EMO vs ENFR growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 13 years both funds cover.
EMO vs ENFR Performance
ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund Inc. (EMO) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) is an ETF from ALPS Advisors. Over the past year EMO returned +26.01% while ENFR returned +27.30%. Year to date, EMO is up 17.67% versus a gain of 22.06% for ENFR.
Over three years, EMO compounded at +25.41% per year against +24.01% for ENFR; over five years the annualized figures are +24.41% and +18.07% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, ENFR has the edge at +5.75% annualized vs -3.03%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 44.9% compared with 24.2% for ENFR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -97.2% for EMO and -74.3% for ENFR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMO charges 3.37% per year while ENFR charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $337 vs $35 annually, a gap of $302 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMO currently yields 7.97% against 4.21% for ENFR.
Holdings Overlap
88.7% of EMO's money is in holdings ENFR also owns. 78.0% of ENFR's money is in holdings EMO also owns.
Most of EMO is already inside ENFR. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
17 positions in common, counted across the 22 positions we hold weights for in EMO and 29 in ENFR, against full books of 23 and 29.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 8 positions for ENFR that do not appear in our book for EMO (11.8% of the fund), and 5 for EMO that do not appear in ENFR (11.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EMO | Weight in ENFR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ETEnergy Transfer | 9.73% | 8.65% | 1.08% |
| TRGPTarga Resources Corp Preferred | 11.70% | 5.10% | 6.60% |
| WMBWilliams Cos. Inc. | 7.84% | 6.16% | 1.68% |
| EPDEnterprise Products Partners Lp | 6.08% | 7.15% | 1.07% |
| MPLXMplx Lp | 7.17% | 4.99% | 2.18% |
| OKEOneok Inc. | 7.01% | 4.85% | 2.16% |
| ENB:CAEnbridge Inc. | 4.55% | 7.19% | 2.64% |
| KMIKinder Morgan Inc./de | 6.38% | 5.30% | 1.08% |
| WESWestern Midstream Partners Lp | 7.25% | 2.70% | 4.55% |
| PAGPPlains Gp Holdings Lp | 4.59% | 4.94% | 0.35% |
88.7% of EMO is already inside ENFR.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EMO or ENFR?
EMO has an expense ratio of 3.37% while ENFR charges 0.35%. ENFR is the cheaper option, by $302 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EMO or ENFR?
Over the past year EMO returned +26.01% vs +27.30% for ENFR, so ENFR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), EMO annualized -3.03% vs +5.75% for ENFR. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EMO or ENFR?
EMO has been the more volatile fund at 44.9% annualized versus 24.2% for ENFR. Worst drawdown: EMO -97.2% vs ENFR -74.3%.
Should I hold both EMO and ENFR?
EMO and ENFR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between EMO and ENFR?
88.7% of EMO's money is in holdings ENFR also owns. 78.0% of ENFR's is in holdings EMO also owns. They hold 17 positions in common, counted across the 22 positions we hold weights for in EMO and 29 in ENFR.
Which pays a higher dividend, EMO or ENFR?
EMO yields 7.97% while ENFR yields 4.21%, so EMO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ENFR better than EMO?
ENFR has a lower expense ratio. EMO led over 3Y and 5Y, ENFR over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. ENFR is less concentrated, with 59.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 72.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.