PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IPAV vs. RIFR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IPAV vs. RIFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF (IPAV) and Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAV achieves a 13.76% return, which is significantly higher than RIFR's 8.62% return.


IPAV

1D
-0.76%
1M
-0.53%
YTD
13.76%
6M
16.75%
1Y
29.12%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

RIFR

1D
-0.38%
1M
-1.89%
YTD
8.62%
6M
8.08%
1Y
12.80%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IPAV vs. RIFR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IPAV and RIFR is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2025

0.37

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

IPAV vs. RIFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAV
IPAV Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
IPAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IPAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
IPAV Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
IPAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
IPAV Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

RIFR
RIFR Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
RIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
RIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
RIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
RIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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.

IPAV vs. RIFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF (IPAV) and Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR). 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.


IPAVRIFRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.22

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.00

1.89

+0.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.38

6.07

+1.32

IPAV vs. RIFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAV Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the RIFR Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAV and RIFR, 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


IPAVRIFRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.71

1.22

+0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.13

1.47

-0.34

Drawdowns

IPAV vs. RIFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAV drawdown since its inception was -14.59%, which is greater than RIFR's maximum drawdown of -6.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAV and RIFR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IPAVRIFRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.59%

-6.80%

-7.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.59%

-6.80%

-7.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.07%

-4.18%

-0.89%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.53%

-1.61%

-1.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.95%

2.12%

+1.83%

Volatility

IPAV vs. RIFR - Volatility Comparison

Global X Infrastructure Development ex-U.S. ETF (IPAV) has a higher volatility of 6.49% compared to Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) at 3.50%. This indicates that IPAV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RIFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IPAVRIFRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.49%

3.50%

+2.99%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.59%

8.52%

+6.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.08%

10.51%

+6.57%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.69%

10.69%

+7.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.69%

10.69%

+7.00%

IPAV vs. RIFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than RIFR's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

IPAV vs. RIFR - Dividend Comparison

IPAV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, more than RIFR's 0.90% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


IPAV and RIFR have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IPAV has higher volatility (6.49%) compared to RIFR (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAV dropped -14.59% vs RIFR's -6.80%.

On 1-year performance, IPAV leads with 29.12% vs 12.80% for RIFR. On fees, IPAV is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, RIFR has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IPAV has performed better with a 29.12% return vs 12.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IPAV is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for RIFR.

IPAV has the higher dividend yield at 1.13%, compared with 0.90% for RIFR.

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Russell. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for IPAV and 0.59% for RIFR.

IPAV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.22), 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 IPAV and RIFR

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