PPA vs. RIFR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PPA (Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF) and RIFR (Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PPA is a Aerospace & Defense fund tracking the SPADE Defense Index, while RIFR is a Industrials Equities fund actively managed by Russell. PPA is passively managed, while RIFR is actively managed. Over the past year, PPA returned 26.57% vs 12.80% for RIFR. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PPA charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for RIFR.

Performance

PPA vs. RIFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA) and Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with PPA having a 8.54% return and RIFR slightly higher at 8.62%.

PPA

• 1D: -1.74%
• 1M: 3.19%
• YTD: 8.54%
• 6M: 13.46%
• 1Y: 26.57%
• 3Y*: 28.92%
• 5Y*: 17.82%
• 10Y*: 17.38%

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)

PPA vs. RIFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF	8.54%	22.63%
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	8.62%	7.21%

Correlation

The correlation between PPA and RIFR is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2025	0.31

Return for Risk

PPA vs. RIFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PPA

PPA Risk / Return Rank: 37
PPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
PPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
PPA Omega Ratio Rank: 35
PPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
PPA Martin Ratio Rank: 36

RIFR

RIFR Risk / Return Rank: 36
RIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
RIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
RIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 33
RIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
RIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

PPA vs. RIFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA) 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.

	PPA	RIFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	1.22	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	1.73	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.22	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	1.89	+0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.68	6.07	-0.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PPA vs. RIFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PPA Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is comparable to the RIFR Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PPA 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PPA	RIFR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.40	1.22	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.66	1.47	-0.81

Drawdowns

PPA vs. RIFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PPA drawdown since its inception was -57.37%, which is greater than RIFR's maximum drawdown of -6.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PPA and RIFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PPA	RIFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.37%	-6.80%	-50.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.71%	-6.80%	-6.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.24%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.37%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.92%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.40%	-4.18%	-4.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.18%	-1.61%	-7.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.69%	2.12%	+2.57%

Volatility

PPA vs. RIFR - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF (PPA) has a higher volatility of 6.73% compared to Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) at 3.50%. This indicates that PPA'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.

Volatility by Period

	PPA	RIFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.73%	3.50%	+3.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.95%	8.52%	+7.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.03%	10.51%	+8.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.49%	10.69%	+7.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.64%	10.69%	+9.95%

PPA vs. RIFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PPA has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than RIFR's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

PPA vs. RIFR - Dividend Comparison

PPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than RIFR's 0.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PPA Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF	0.39%	0.42%	0.61%	0.67%	0.83%	0.59%	0.88%	0.95%	0.90%	0.67%	1.70%	1.41%
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	0.90%	0.98%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PPA and RIFR in my portfolio?

PPA and RIFR have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PPA or RIFR?

PPA has higher volatility (6.73%) compared to RIFR (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PPA dropped -57.37% vs RIFR's -6.80%.

Which ETF is better, PPA or RIFR?

On 1-year performance, PPA leads with 26.57% vs 12.80% for RIFR. On fees, PPA is cheaper at 0.58% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PPA or RIFR?

Over the 1-year period, PPA has performed better with a 26.57% return vs 12.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PPA or RIFR?

PPA is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for RIFR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PPA or RIFR?

RIFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.90%, compared with 0.39% for PPA.

What is the main difference between PPA and RIFR?

PPA is categorized as Aerospace & Defense, while RIFR is Industrials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Russell. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for PPA and 0.59% for RIFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 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.