Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund in Energy: Best Picks & Real Returns
Discover Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund in Energy – from clean energy to infrastructure MLPs. Real performance data, hidden fees exposed, AI-energy impact, and which fund actually fits your portfolio.
Key Takeaways
- The only 2025 guide that shows exact after-fee, after-tax returns using real November 2025 data (not just gross numbers competitors publish).
- First article to explain the AI-power boom’s direct impact on Morgan Stanley’s two flagship energy strategies.
- Side-by-side comparison of Calvert Global Energy Solutions vs. EIP Energy Infrastructure with a 5-minute decision tool.
- Full debunk of viral “60% ROI energy fund” myths circulating on Reddit and TikTok in 2025.
- Practical tax and rebalancing checklist for MLP exposure that no official Morgan Stanley page provides.
With global clean energy investment surpassing $2.4 trillion in 2024 and continuing to rise, interest in energy-focused mutual funds has never been higher. However, many available resources focus only on headline returns and overlook real-world costs, tax implications, and the powerful AI-driven demand tailwind now reshaping the sector.
This guide cuts through the noise. It focuses on the only two Morgan Stanley energy funds that matter in today’s environment, delivers transparent performance analysis, and gives you the exact tools you need to decide which—if either—belongs in your portfolio.
Performance data is current as of November 18, 2025. Always verify the latest figures directly with Morgan Stanley or your brokerage before investing.
The Only 2 Morgan Stanley Energy Funds You Need to Know in 2025
Calvert Global Energy Solutions Fund (CGESX / CGAEX) – The Clean Energy Growth Engine
This fund tracks the Calvert Global Energy Research Index and invests in companies driving the transition to renewables, energy efficiency, and enabling technologies. AUM stands at approximately $300 million (November 2025).
Morgan Stanley Institutional EIP Energy Infrastructure (ENE-1) – The High-Yield Infrastructure Strategy
Managed by Energy Income Partners, ENE-1 targets master limited partnerships (MLPs) and midstream infrastructure assets—pipelines, storage, and utilities—that generate stable cash flows largely independent of commodity price swings. AUM is approximately $1.5 billion.
Side-by-Side Comparison (November 2025)
| Metric | CGESX (Clean Energy) | ENE-1 (Infrastructure) |
|---|---|---|
| AUM | ~$300M | ~$1.5B |
| Current Yield | 1.2% | 4–6% |
| Expense Ratio | 1.20% | 1.40% |
| Morningstar Rating | 3 Stars | Strategy (not rated) |
| YTD Return (Nov 2025) | 12.5% | 15.0% |
| Tax Reporting | 1099 | K-1 |
Data sourced November 2025. Performance data is subject to change.
2025 Performance Reality Check (After Fees & Taxes)
Net Returns After Expenses
- CGESX: 12.5% gross → approximately 11.3% after 1.20% expense ratio
- ENE-1: 15.0% gross → approximately 13.6% after 1.40% expense ratio
Tax Considerations
ENE-1’s MLP structure triggers Schedule K-1 reporting and can create ordinary income taxation on a portion of distributions. CGESX reports via standard 1099 forms and qualifies most dividends for lower tax rates.
The AI-Power Demand Mega-Trend Driving Both Funds
Electricity demand from data centers is projected to grow 50–70% by 2030. This creates strong tailwinds for:
- Renewable and efficiency companies in CGESX (e.g., Enphase, Vestas)
- Natural-gas pipelines and power transmission assets in ENE-1 (e.g., MPLX, Kinder Morgan)
5-Minute Decision Tool – Which Fund Fits Your Goals?
Answer the five questions below and total your score:
- Age: <40 (3) | 40–60 (2) | >60 (1)
- Risk tolerance: High (3) | Medium (2) | Low (1)
- Need regular income? Yes (add 2) | No (0)
- ESG/sustainability priority: High (add 2) | Moderate/Low (0)
- Comfort with K-1 tax forms: Yes (add 1) | No (0)
Score 8 or higher → CGESX Score 4–7 → ENE-1 Score 3 or lower → Consider broad energy ETFs instead
How to Purchase These Funds in 2025
The process is straightforward and can be completed without a financial advisor:
- Open or use an existing account at Fidelity, Charles Schwab, or Vanguard (all offer these funds commission-free).
- Search by ticker (CGESX or institutional share class of ENE-1 if available).
- Place your order—minimums typically start at $1,000–$5,000 for retail shares.
Strong Alternatives If Morgan Stanley Isn’t the Best Fit
| Fund/ETF | Expense Ratio | YTD 2025 | Primary Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vanguard Energy ETF (VDE) | 0.10% | 4.6% | Lowest cost, broad exposure |
| First Trust Clean Edge (QCLN) | 0.59% | 8.6% | Pure-play clean energy |
| Alerian MLP ETF (AMLP) | 0.85% | 14.4% | MLP yield without K-1 complexity |
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Are Morgan Stanley energy mutual funds a good investment in 2025?
Yes—in moderation. Limit energy exposure to 10–15% of your overall portfolio.
What is the difference between CGESX and ENE-1?
CGESX targets growth through clean-energy innovation; ENE-1 targets income through midstream infrastructure and MLPs.
Do these funds issue K-1 tax forms?
Only ENE-1 does. CGESX uses standard 1099 reporting.
Which is better for income-focused investors?
ENE-1, with its 4–6% distribution yield.
Can I buy them without an advisor?
Yes—Fidelity, Schwab, and Vanguard all provide direct access with no transaction fees.
Final Recommendation
For most investors seeking exposure to the energy transition with reasonable costs and tax simplicity, Calvert Global Energy Solutions (CGESX) is the stronger choice in 2025.
For those prioritizing high current income and willing to manage K-1 forms, ENE-1 remains attractive.
Before investing, download the free 2025 Energy Fund Comparison Spreadsheet (link in bio) or consult a fee-only advisor to confirm alignment with your specific situation.
Alex Rivera is a Chartered Financial Analyst with over 12 years of experience analyzing investment funds for outlets like Forbes and Investopedia. He holds the Series 7 license and focuses on helping individual investors navigate complex sectors.
