PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IFGL vs. RDOG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IFGL vs. RDOG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares International Developed Real Estate ETF (IFGL) and ALPS REIT Dividend Dogs ETF (RDOG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFGL achieves a -2.19% return, which is significantly lower than RDOG's 13.77% return. Over the past 10 years, IFGL has underperformed RDOG with an annualized return of 1.41%, while RDOG has yielded a comparatively higher 4.05% annualized return.


IFGL

1D
-1.17%
1M
-4.06%
YTD
-2.19%
6M
-0.58%
1Y
6.13%
3Y*
6.59%
5Y*
-2.66%
10Y*
1.41%

RDOG

1D
-0.80%
1M
3.92%
YTD
13.77%
6M
14.44%
1Y
20.06%
3Y*
11.40%
5Y*
2.28%
10Y*
4.05%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IFGL vs. RDOG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IFGL
iShares International Developed Real Estate ETF
-2.19%24.31%-7.25%5.40%-24.21%8.29%-7.62%20.65%-6.39%20.00%
RDOG
ALPS REIT Dividend Dogs ETF
13.77%0.95%4.57%10.38%-25.53%34.42%-10.01%21.54%-5.70%11.84%

Correlation

The correlation between IFGL and RDOG is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.55

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.63

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2008

0.69

The correlation between IFGL and RDOG shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.69 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IFGL vs. RDOG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IFGL
RDOG

Real Estate

98.9%
100.0%

Technology

1.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

0.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Real Estate

IFGL
98.9%
RDOG
100.0%

Technology

IFGL
1.1%
RDOG

-

Consumer Cyclical

IFGL
0.1%
RDOG

-

Basic Materials

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Communication Services

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Consumer Defensive

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Energy

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Financial Services

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Healthcare

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Industrials

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Utilities

IFGL

-

RDOG

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

IFGL vs. RDOG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IFGL
IFGL Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
IFGL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFGL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFGL Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
IFGL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFGL Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

RDOG
RDOG Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
RDOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RDOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
RDOG Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
RDOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
RDOG Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IFGL vs. RDOG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares International Developed Real Estate ETF (IFGL) and ALPS REIT Dividend Dogs ETF (RDOG). 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.


IFGLRDOGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.94

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.24

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.43

2.01

-1.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.32

6.51

-5.19

IFGL vs. RDOG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFGL Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is lower than the RDOG Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFGL and RDOG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IFGLRDOGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

1.39

-0.94

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.16

0.12

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.09

0.18

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.04

0.17

-0.13

Drawdowns

IFGL vs. RDOG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFGL drawdown since its inception was -67.94%, roughly equal to the maximum RDOG drawdown of -67.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFGL and RDOG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IFGLRDOGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.94%

-67.59%

-0.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.38%

-10.02%

-4.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.77%

-21.40%

+2.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.47%

-35.52%

-2.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.38%

-49.35%

+8.97%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.94%

-2.03%

-12.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.68%

-12.26%

-4.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.65%

3.09%

+1.56%

Volatility

IFGL vs. RDOG - Volatility Comparison

iShares International Developed Real Estate ETF (IFGL) has a higher volatility of 4.54% compared to ALPS REIT Dividend Dogs ETF (RDOG) at 3.98%. This indicates that IFGL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RDOG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IFGLRDOGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.54%

3.98%

+0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.46%

10.42%

+1.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.68%

14.52%

-0.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.38%

19.84%

-3.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.59%

23.05%

-6.46%

IFGL vs. RDOG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFGL has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than RDOG's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

IFGL vs. RDOG - Dividend Comparison

IFGL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.90%, less than RDOG's 6.13% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IFGL
iShares International Developed Real Estate ETF
3.90%3.71%4.83%1.82%2.79%3.25%2.17%7.60%4.10%4.90%7.68%3.70%
RDOG
ALPS REIT Dividend Dogs ETF
6.13%6.91%6.11%7.07%5.25%3.11%5.12%3.10%3.13%3.64%3.66%3.43%

Frequently Asked Questions


IFGL and RDOG have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IFGL has higher volatility (4.54%) compared to RDOG (3.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFGL dropped -67.94% vs RDOG's -67.59%.

On 10-year performance, RDOG leads with 4.05% vs 1.41% for IFGL. On fees, RDOG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, RDOG has been the lower-risk option at 3.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RDOG has performed better with a 4.05% return vs 1.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RDOG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for IFGL.

RDOG has the higher dividend yield at 6.13%, compared with 3.90% for IFGL.

IFGL tracks FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate ex-U.S. Index, while RDOG tracks S-Network REIT Dividend Dogs Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for IFGL and 0.35% for RDOG.

RDOG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs 0.45), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IFGL and RDOG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer