RGLO vs. RIFR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RGLO (Russell Investments Global Equity ETF) and RIFR (Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RGLO is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Russell, while RIFR is a Industrials Equities fund actively managed by Russell. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RGLO returned 28.81% vs 15.55% for RIFR. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RGLO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for RIFR.

Performance

RGLO vs. RIFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Global Equity ETF (RGLO) 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 RGLO having a 9.72% return and RIFR slightly higher at 9.78%.

RGLO

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 0.55%
• YTD: 9.72%
• 6M: 9.92%
• 1Y: 28.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RIFR

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: -0.95%
• YTD: 9.78%
• 6M: 10.57%
• 1Y: 15.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RGLO vs. RIFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RGLO Russell Investments Global Equity ETF	9.72%	17.96%
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	9.78%	4.97%

Correlation

The correlation between RGLO and RIFR is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2025	0.29

Return for Risk

RGLO vs. RIFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RGLO

RGLO Risk / Return Rank: 69
RGLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
RGLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
RGLO Omega Ratio Rank: 69
RGLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
RGLO Martin Ratio Rank: 73

RIFR

RIFR Risk / Return Rank: 44
RIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
RIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
RIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 41
RIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
RIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

RGLO vs. RIFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Equity ETF (RGLO) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	RGLO	RIFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.20	1.47	+0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.04	2.04	+1.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.26	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.01	2.29	+0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.30	7.07	+6.23

RGLO vs. RIFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RGLO Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is higher than the RIFR Sharpe Ratio of 1.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RGLO 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.

Drawdowns

RGLO vs. RIFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RGLO drawdown since its inception was -9.61%, which is greater than RIFR's maximum drawdown of -6.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RGLO and RIFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RGLO	RIFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.61%	-6.80%	-2.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.61%	-6.80%	-2.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.39%	-3.16%	+1.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.19%	-1.66%	+0.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.17%	2.20%	-0.03%

Volatility

RGLO vs. RIFR - Volatility Comparison

Russell Investments Global Equity ETF (RGLO) has a higher volatility of 4.47% compared to Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) at 3.33%. This indicates that RGLO'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

	RGLO	RIFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.47%	3.33%	+1.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.57%	8.69%	+1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.18%	10.66%	+2.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.01%	10.68%	+2.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.01%	10.68%	+2.33%

RGLO vs. RIFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RGLO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than RIFR's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

RGLO vs. RIFR - Dividend Comparison

RGLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than RIFR's 0.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
RGLO Russell Investments Global Equity ETF	0.58%	0.63%
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	0.89%	0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RGLO and RIFR in my portfolio?

RGLO and RIFR have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RGLO or RIFR?

RGLO has higher volatility (4.47%) compared to RIFR (3.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RGLO dropped -9.61% vs RIFR's -6.80%.

Which ETF is better, RGLO or RIFR?

On 1-year performance, RGLO leads with 28.81% vs 15.55% for RIFR. On fees, RGLO is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, RIFR has been the lower-risk option at 3.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RGLO or RIFR?

Over the 1-year period, RGLO has performed better with a 28.81% return vs 15.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RGLO or RIFR?

RGLO is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for RIFR.

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

RIFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.58% for RGLO.

What is the main difference between RGLO and RIFR?

RGLO is categorized as Global Equities, while RIFR is Industrials Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for RGLO and 0.59% for RIFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RGLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.20 vs 1.47), 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.