RFAYX vs. QDIBX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RFAYX (Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund) and QDIBX (Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. Over the past 5 years, RFAYX returned -0.39%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for QDIBX. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFAYX charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for QDIBX.

Performance

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund (RFAYX) and Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans (QDIBX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFAYX achieves a 0.16% return, which is significantly higher than QDIBX's -0.22% return.

RFAYX

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 0.07%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: 0.28%
• 1Y: 4.56%
• 3Y*: 3.89%
• 5Y*: -0.39%
• 10Y*: 1.57%

QDIBX

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -0.11%
• YTD: -0.22%
• 6M: -0.09%
• 1Y: 4.08%
• 3Y*: 4.36%
• 5Y*: 0.09%
• 10Y*: —

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

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
RFAYX Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund	0.16%	7.47%	1.57%	4.85%	-14.80%	-1.09%	9.10%	-0.28%
QDIBX Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans	-0.22%	7.72%	1.66%	6.71%	-14.11%	-0.17%	6.77%	-0.10%

Correlation

The correlation between RFAYX and QDIBX is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2019	0.92

The correlation between RFAYX and QDIBX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RFAYX vs. QDIBX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFAYX

RFAYX Risk / Return Rank: 26
RFAYX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
RFAYX Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
RFAYX Omega Ratio Rank: 25
RFAYX Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
RFAYX Martin Ratio Rank: 24

QDIBX

QDIBX Risk / Return Rank: 19
QDIBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
QDIBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
QDIBX Omega Ratio Rank: 18
QDIBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
QDIBX Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund (RFAYX) and Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans (QDIBX). 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.

	RFAYX	QDIBX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.23	+0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	1.84	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.22	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	1.58	+0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.69	4.77	+0.92
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFAYX Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the QDIBX Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFAYX and QDIBX, 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

	RFAYX	QDIBX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	1.23	+0.20
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.07	0.01	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.32	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	0.16	+0.59

Drawdowns

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFAYX drawdown since its inception was -19.61%, roughly equal to the maximum QDIBX drawdown of -19.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFAYX and QDIBX.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFAYX	QDIBX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.61%	-19.63%	+0.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.73%	-2.97%	+0.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.32%	-5.37%	-0.95%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.61%	-19.63%	+0.02%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-19.61%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.21%	-1.98%	-2.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.98%	-6.39%	+3.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.91%	0.98%	-0.07%

Volatility

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Volatility Comparison

Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund (RFAYX) and Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans (QDIBX) have volatilities of 1.26% and 1.25%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFAYX	QDIBX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.26%	1.25%	+0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.52%	2.60%	-0.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.65%	3.82%	-0.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.90%	6.59%	-0.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.90%	6.26%	-1.36%

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFAYX has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than QDIBX's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFAYX vs. QDIBX - Dividend Comparison

RFAYX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.44%, more than QDIBX's 3.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QDIBX Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans	3.51%	3.50%	3.55%	3.65%	2.51%	1.80%	3.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RFAYX Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund	5.44%	5.19%	4.74%	3.71%	1.25%	2.50%	5.27%	3.46%	2.67%	1.57%	5.45%	4.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFAYX and QDIBX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, RFAYX and QDIBX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, RFAYX or QDIBX?

RFAYX has higher volatility (1.26%) compared to QDIBX (1.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFAYX dropped -19.61% vs QDIBX's -19.63%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RFAYX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 1.23), 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.