RIFR vs. EMLP
RIFR (Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF) and EMLP (First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RIFR returned 14.73% vs 19.09% for EMLP. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RIFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.96%/yr for EMLP.
Performance
RIFR vs. EMLP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RIFR achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly lower than EMLP's 17.75% return.
RIFR
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- 6M
- 7.94%
- YTD
- 11.99%
- 1Y
- 14.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.30%
EMLP
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- 0.62%
- 6M
- 11.20%
- YTD
- 17.75%
- 1Y
- 19.09%
- 3Y*
- 20.43%
- 5Y*
- 16.56%
- 10Y*
- 10.12%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.68%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $12.88M | $10.50M | $12.16M | |
| $131.11K | $117.29K | $147.83K |
RIFR vs. EMLP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF | 11.99% | 7.25% |
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund | 17.75% | 5.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between RIFR and EMLP is 0.77, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025 | 0.74 |
The correlation between RIFR and EMLP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.77 - 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
RIFR vs. EMLP — Risk / Return Rank
RIFR
EMLP
RIFR vs. EMLP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP). 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.
| RIFR | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.34 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.30 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.28 | 3.72 | -1.44 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.92 | 10.54 | -3.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RIFR vs. EMLP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RIFR drawdown since its inception was -6.80%, smaller than the maximum EMLP drawdown of -43.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIFR and EMLP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RIFR | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.80% | -43.61% | +36.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.80% | -4.94% | -1.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -11.47% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.59% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -43.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.21% | -1.94% | +0.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.62% | -5.71% | +4.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.24% | 1.74% | +0.50% |
Volatility
RIFR vs. EMLP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) is 3.04%, while First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund (EMLP) has a volatility of 3.87%. This indicates that RIFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMLP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RIFR | EMLP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.04% | 3.87% | -0.83% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.91% | 8.48% | +0.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.81% | 10.36% | +0.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.69% | 14.49% | -3.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.69% | 17.67% | -6.98% |
RIFR vs. EMLP - Expense Ratio Comparison
RIFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLP's 0.96% expense ratio.
Dividends
RIFR vs. EMLP - Dividend Comparison
RIFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than EMLP's 2.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP First Trust North American Energy Infrastructure Fund | 2.76% | 3.18% | 3.19% | 3.92% | 3.15% | 3.29% | 4.70% | 3.71% | 4.71% | 3.80% | 3.62% | 4.63% |
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF | 0.87% | 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
RIFR and EMLP have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMLP has higher volatility (3.87%) compared to RIFR (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIFR dropped -6.80% vs EMLP's -43.61%.
On 1-year performance, EMLP leads with 19.09% vs 14.73% for RIFR. On fees, RIFR is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, RIFR has been the lower-risk option at 3.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EMLP has performed better with a 19.09% return vs 14.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RIFR is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.96% for EMLP.
EMLP has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 0.87% for RIFR.
They also come from different issuers: Russell and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for RIFR and 0.96% for EMLP.
EMLP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.43), 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 RIFR and EMLP
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