RCGE vs. SPGM

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

RCGE (RockCreek Global Equality ETF) and SPGM (SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF) are both Global Equities funds. RCGE is actively managed, while SPGM is passively managed. Over the past year, RCGE returned 11.30% vs 27.45% for SPGM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RCGE charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for SPGM.

Performance

RCGE vs. SPGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in RockCreek Global Equality ETF (RCGE) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RCGE achieves a 2.35% return, which is significantly lower than SPGM's 10.02% return.

RCGE

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: 0.03%
• YTD: 2.35%
• 6M: 4.49%
• 1Y: 11.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SPGM

• 1D: -3.08%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 10.02%
• 6M: 10.30%
• 1Y: 27.45%
• 3Y*: 20.31%
• 5Y*: 10.91%
• 10Y*: 12.50%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RCGE vs. SPGM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RCGE RockCreek Global Equality ETF	2.35%	17.28%
SPGM SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF	10.02%	21.53%

Correlation

The correlation between RCGE and SPGM is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2025	0.83

The correlation between RCGE and SPGM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RCGE vs. SPGM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RCGE

RCGE Risk / Return Rank: 29
RCGE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
RCGE Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
RCGE Omega Ratio Rank: 28
RCGE Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
RCGE Martin Ratio Rank: 32

SPGM

SPGM Risk / Return Rank: 67
SPGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
SPGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
SPGM Omega Ratio Rank: 67
SPGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
SPGM Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

RCGE vs. SPGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for RockCreek Global Equality ETF (RCGE) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). 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.

	RCGE	SPGM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	2.16	-1.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	2.91	-1.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.39	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.28	3.01	-1.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.40	13.54	-9.14
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RCGE vs. SPGM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RCGE Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the SPGM Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RCGE and SPGM, 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

	RCGE	SPGM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97	2.16	-1.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.71	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.02	0.65	+0.37

Drawdowns

RCGE vs. SPGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RCGE drawdown since its inception was -12.38%, smaller than the maximum SPGM drawdown of -33.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RCGE and SPGM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RCGE	SPGM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.38%	-33.97%	+21.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.33%	-9.50%	+0.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.90%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.93%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.97%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.09%	-3.37%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.83%	-4.80%	+2.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.71%	2.11%	+0.60%

Volatility

RCGE vs. SPGM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for RockCreek Global Equality ETF (RCGE) is 4.15%, while SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that RCGE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RCGE	SPGM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.15%	4.67%	-0.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.69%	10.85%	-1.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.35%	13.27%	-0.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.24%	16.08%	-0.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.24%	17.60%	-2.36%

RCGE vs. SPGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RCGE has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SPGM's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

RCGE vs. SPGM - Dividend Comparison

RCGE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than SPGM's 1.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RCGE RockCreek Global Equality ETF	1.77%	1.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SPGM SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF	1.84%	1.89%	1.98%	2.09%	2.37%	1.94%	1.45%	2.46%	1.89%	2.29%	1.87%	3.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RCGE and SPGM in my portfolio?

RCGE and SPGM have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RCGE or SPGM?

SPGM has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to RCGE (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RCGE dropped -12.38% vs SPGM's -33.97%.

Which ETF is better, RCGE or SPGM?

On 1-year performance, SPGM leads with 27.45% vs 11.30% for RCGE. On fees, SPGM is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, RCGE has been the lower-risk option at 4.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RCGE or SPGM?

Over the 1-year period, SPGM has performed better with a 27.45% return vs 11.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RCGE or SPGM?

SPGM is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RCGE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RCGE or SPGM?

SPGM has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 1.77% for RCGE.

What is the main difference between RCGE and SPGM?

They also come from different issuers: RockCreek and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RCGE and 0.09% for SPGM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SPGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 0.97), 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.