PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RIFR vs. JETS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RIFR vs. JETS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and U.S. Global Jets ETF (JETS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RIFR having a 11.99% return and JETS slightly lower at 11.44%.


RIFR

1D
-0.25%
1M
0.17%
6M
7.94%
YTD
11.99%
1Y
14.73%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
16.30%

JETS

1D
-1.26%
1M
-5.78%
6M
11.91%
YTD
11.44%
1Y
36.40%
3Y*
14.53%
5Y*
6.76%
10Y*
4.27%
ALL TIME*
2.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$81.88M$89.07M$95.81M
$131.11K$117.29K$147.83K

RIFR vs. JETS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
RIFR
Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF
11.99%7.25%
JETS
U.S. Global Jets ETF
11.44%22.46%

Correlation

The correlation between RIFR and JETS is 0.20, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025

0.22

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. JETS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RIFR
RIFR Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
RIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
RIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
RIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
RIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

JETS
JETS Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
JETS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JETS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
JETS Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
JETS Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
JETS Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RIFR vs. JETS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and U.S. Global Jets ETF (JETS). 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.


RIFRJETSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.18

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.28

1.32

+0.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.92

3.34

+3.58

RIFR vs. JETS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RIFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is higher than the JETS Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RIFR and JETS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

RIFR vs. JETS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RIFR drawdown since its inception was -6.80%, smaller than the maximum JETS drawdown of -64.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIFR and JETS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RIFRJETSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.80%

-64.92%

+58.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.80%

-24.13%

+17.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-35.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-64.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.21%

-7.16%

+5.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.62%

-24.94%

+23.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.24%

9.52%

-7.28%

Volatility

RIFR vs. JETS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) is 3.04%, while U.S. Global Jets ETF (JETS) has a volatility of 9.08%. This indicates that RIFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JETS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RIFRJETSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.04%

9.08%

-6.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.91%

26.62%

-17.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.81%

32.90%

-22.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.69%

32.50%

-21.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.69%

34.21%

-23.52%

RIFR vs. JETS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

RIFR vs. JETS - Dividend Comparison

RIFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than JETS's 0.74% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
JETS
U.S. Global Jets ETF
0.74%0.83%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.67%0.04%1.24%0.09%1.57%0.58%0.17%
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 JETS have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

JETS has higher volatility (9.08%) compared to RIFR (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIFR dropped -6.80% vs JETS's -64.92%.

On 1-year performance, JETS leads with 36.40% 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, JETS has performed better with a 36.40% 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 0.60% for JETS.

RIFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.74% for JETS.

RIFR is categorized as Infrastructure Equities, while JETS is Industrials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Russell and US Global. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for RIFR and 0.60% for JETS.

RIFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.97), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RIFR and JETS

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