RIFR vs. IGM
RIFR (Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF) and IGM (iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RIFR is a Infrastructure Equities fund actively managed by Russell, while IGM is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P North American Expanded Technology Sector Index. RIFR is actively managed, while IGM is passively managed. Over the past year, RIFR returned 14.73% vs 35.58% for IGM. Their -0.06 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. RIFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IGM.
Performance
RIFR vs. IGM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RIFR achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly lower than IGM's 18.94% return.
RIFR
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 0.17%
- 6M
- 7.94%
- YTD
- 11.99%
- 1Y
- 14.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.30%
IGM
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- -2.12%
- 6M
- 19.10%
- YTD
- 18.94%
- 1Y
- 35.58%
- 3Y*
- 30.97%
- 5Y*
- 17.74%
- 10Y*
- 23.39%
- ALL TIME*
- 12.39%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $44.83M | $46.82M | $81.02M | |
| $131.11K | $117.29K | $147.83K |
RIFR vs. IGM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF | 11.99% | 7.25% |
IGM iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF | 18.94% | 25.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between RIFR and IGM is -0.08, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025 | -0.06 |
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. IGM — Risk / Return Rank
RIFR
IGM
RIFR vs. IGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF (IGM). 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 | IGM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.23 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.28 | 1.99 | +0.29 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.92 | 5.76 | +1.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RIFR vs. IGM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RIFR drawdown since its inception was -6.80%, smaller than the maximum IGM drawdown of -65.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIFR and IGM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RIFR | IGM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.80% | -65.59% | +58.79% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.80% | -16.44% | +9.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -26.39% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -40.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.21% | -10.18% | +8.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.62% | -15.18% | +13.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.24% | 5.69% | -3.45% |
Volatility
RIFR vs. IGM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) is 3.04%, while iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF (IGM) has a volatility of 8.54%. This indicates that RIFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RIFR | IGM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.04% | 8.54% | -5.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.91% | 20.37% | -11.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.81% | 24.37% | -13.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.69% | 26.34% | -15.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.69% | 24.84% | -14.15% |
RIFR vs. IGM - Expense Ratio Comparison
RIFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than IGM's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
RIFR vs. IGM - Dividend Comparison
RIFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than IGM's 0.14% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGM iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF | 0.14% | 0.17% | 0.22% | 0.33% | 0.66% | 0.16% | 0.32% | 0.50% | 0.57% | 0.57% | 0.90% | 0.79% |
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 IGM have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IGM has higher volatility (8.54%) compared to RIFR (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIFR dropped -6.80% vs IGM's -65.59%.
On 1-year performance, IGM leads with 35.58% vs 14.73% for RIFR. On fees, IGM is cheaper at 0.39% 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, IGM has performed better with a 35.58% return vs 14.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGM is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for RIFR.
RIFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.14% for IGM.
RIFR is categorized as Infrastructure Equities, while IGM is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Russell and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for RIFR and 0.39% for IGM.
RIFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 1.34), 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 IGM
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