RIFR vs. EVLN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RIFR (Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF) and EVLN (Eaton Vance Floating-Rate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RIFR is a Industrials Equities fund actively managed by Russell, while EVLN is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by Eaton Vance. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RIFR returned 12.80% vs 4.86% for EVLN. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. RIFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for EVLN.

Performance

RIFR vs. EVLN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and Eaton Vance Floating-Rate ETF (EVLN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RIFR achieves a 8.62% return, which is significantly higher than EVLN's 1.37% return.

RIFR

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -1.89%
• YTD: 8.62%
• 6M: 8.08%
• 1Y: 12.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EVLN

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.66%
• YTD: 1.37%
• 6M: 1.73%
• 1Y: 4.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RIFR vs. EVLN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	8.62%	7.21%
EVLN Eaton Vance Floating-Rate ETF	1.37%	4.15%

Correlation

The correlation between RIFR and EVLN is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2025	-0.04

Return for Risk

RIFR vs. EVLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

RIFR

RIFR Risk / Return Rank: 36
RIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
RIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
RIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 33
RIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
RIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 39

EVLN

EVLN Risk / Return Rank: 73
EVLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EVLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
EVLN Omega Ratio Rank: 88
EVLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
EVLN Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

RIFR vs. EVLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and Eaton Vance Floating-Rate ETF (EVLN). 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.

	RIFR	EVLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	2.61	-1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.73	4.39	-2.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.55	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.89	2.76	-0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.07	9.01	-2.94
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RIFR vs. EVLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RIFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the EVLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RIFR and EVLN, 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

	RIFR	EVLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.22	2.61	-1.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.47	2.55	-1.09

Drawdowns

RIFR vs. EVLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RIFR drawdown since its inception was -6.80%, which is greater than EVLN's maximum drawdown of -2.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIFR and EVLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	RIFR	EVLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.80%	-2.78%	-4.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.80%	-1.77%	-5.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.18%	-0.04%	-4.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.61%	-0.22%	-1.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.12%	0.54%	+1.58%

Volatility

RIFR vs. EVLN - Volatility Comparison

Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) has a higher volatility of 3.50% compared to Eaton Vance Floating-Rate ETF (EVLN) at 0.46%. This indicates that RIFR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EVLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RIFR	EVLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	0.46%	+3.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.52%	1.62%	+6.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.51%	1.89%	+8.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.69%	2.43%	+8.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.69%	2.43%	+8.26%

RIFR vs. EVLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

RIFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than EVLN's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

RIFR vs. EVLN - Dividend Comparison

RIFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than EVLN's 6.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
EVLN Eaton Vance Floating-Rate ETF	6.92%	7.28%	6.41%
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	0.90%	0.98%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RIFR and EVLN in my portfolio?

RIFR and EVLN have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RIFR or EVLN?

RIFR has higher volatility (3.50%) compared to EVLN (0.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIFR dropped -6.80% vs EVLN's -2.78%.

Which ETF is better, RIFR or EVLN?

On 1-year performance, RIFR leads with 12.80% vs 4.86% for EVLN. On fees, RIFR is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, EVLN has been the lower-risk option at 0.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RIFR or EVLN?

Over the 1-year period, RIFR has performed better with a 12.80% return vs 4.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RIFR or EVLN?

RIFR is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EVLN.

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

EVLN has the higher dividend yield at 6.92%, compared with 0.90% for RIFR.

What is the main difference between RIFR and EVLN?

RIFR is categorized as Industrials Equities, while EVLN is Bank Loan. They also come from different issuers: Russell and Eaton Vance. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for RIFR and 0.60% for EVLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EVLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 1.22), 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.