RGLO vs. PID
RGLO (Russell Investments Global Equity ETF) and PID (Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Global Equities funds. RGLO is actively managed, while PID is passively managed. Over the past year, RGLO returned 28.28% vs 16.04% for PID. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RGLO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for PID.
Performance
RGLO vs. PID - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RGLO achieves a 10.04% return, which is significantly higher than PID's 5.45% return.
RGLO
- 1D
- -0.80%
- 1M
- 4.54%
- YTD
- 10.04%
- 6M
- 11.57%
- 1Y
- 28.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PID
- 1D
- -1.07%
- 1M
- 1.28%
- YTD
- 5.45%
- 6M
- 6.61%
- 1Y
- 16.04%
- 3Y*
- 12.52%
- 5Y*
- 8.28%
- 10Y*
- 8.80%
RGLO vs. PID - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RGLO Russell Investments Global Equity ETF | 10.04% | 17.37% |
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 5.45% | 10.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between RGLO and PID is 0.61, 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 | 0.61 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2025 | 0.61 |
The correlation between RGLO and PID has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
RGLO vs. PID — Risk / Return Rank
RGLO
PID
RGLO vs. PID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Equity ETF (RGLO) and Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID). 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.
| RGLO | PID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.30 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.96 | 2.16 | +0.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.33 | 7.36 | +5.97 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RGLO | PID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | 1.66 | +0.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.60 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.29 | 0.27 | +2.02 |
Drawdowns
RGLO vs. PID - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RGLO drawdown since its inception was -9.61%, smaller than the maximum PID drawdown of -66.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RGLO and PID.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RGLO | PID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.61% | -66.34% | +56.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.61% | -7.47% | -2.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -13.34% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.97% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -46.07% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.10% | -2.19% | +1.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.16% | -13.04% | +11.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.13% | 2.18% | -0.05% |
Volatility
RGLO vs. PID - Volatility Comparison
Russell Investments Global Equity ETF (RGLO) has a higher volatility of 3.65% compared to Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID) at 2.75%. This indicates that RGLO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RGLO | PID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.65% | 2.75% | +0.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.90% | 7.62% | +2.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.72% | 9.70% | +3.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.69% | 13.97% | -1.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.69% | 17.84% | -5.15% |
RGLO vs. PID - Expense Ratio Comparison
RGLO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than PID's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
RGLO vs. PID - Dividend Comparison
RGLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than PID's 3.27% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF | 3.27% | 3.28% | 3.88% | 3.31% | 3.30% | 3.30% | 3.16% | 3.99% | 3.87% | 3.46% | 3.90% | 4.48% |
RGLO Russell Investments Global Equity ETF | 0.58% | 0.63% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RGLO and PID have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RGLO has higher volatility (3.65%) compared to PID (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RGLO dropped -9.61% vs PID's -66.34%.
On 1-year performance, RGLO leads with 28.28% vs 16.04% for PID. On fees, RGLO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, PID has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RGLO has performed better with a 28.28% return vs 16.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RGLO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PID.
PID has the higher dividend yield at 3.27%, compared with 0.58% for RGLO.
They also come from different issuers: Russell and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for RGLO and 0.56% for PID.
RGLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.66), 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.
Find the right allocation for RGLO and PID
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