RIFR vs. PIPE

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

RIFR (Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF) and PIPE (Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both Infrastructure Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RIFR returned 14.73% vs 32.12% for PIPE. Their 0.47 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. RIFR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PIPE.

Performance

RIFR vs. PIPE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RIFR achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly lower than PIPE's 29.62% return.

RIFR

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

PIPE

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 3.42%
• 6M: 20.35%
• YTD: 29.62%
• 1Y: 32.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.86%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	$120.83K	$81.36K	$87.35K
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	$131.11K	$117.29K	$147.83K

RIFR vs. PIPE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	11.99%	7.25%
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	29.62%	2.83%

Correlation

The correlation between RIFR and PIPE is 0.50, 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.	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025	0.47

The correlation between RIFR and PIPE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RIFR vs. PIPE — Risk / Return Rank

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

RIFR

RIFR Risk / Return Rank: 60
RIFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
RIFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
RIFR Omega Ratio Rank: 57
RIFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
RIFR Martin Ratio Rank: 57

PIPE

PIPE Risk / Return Rank: 86
PIPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PIPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
PIPE Omega Ratio Rank: 84
PIPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
PIPE Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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. PIPE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) and Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE). 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	PIPE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	2.12	-0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	2.88	-0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.36	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	4.30	-2.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.92	10.31	-3.39

RIFR vs. PIPE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RIFR Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the PIPE Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RIFR and PIPE, 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

RIFR vs. PIPE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RIFR drawdown since its inception was -6.80%, smaller than the maximum PIPE drawdown of -15.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIFR and PIPE.

Drawdown Indicators

	RIFR	PIPE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.80%	-15.69%	+8.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.80%	-7.33%	+0.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.21%	-2.64%	+1.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.62%	-3.94%	+2.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.24%	3.06%	-0.82%

Volatility

RIFR vs. PIPE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF (RIFR) is 3.04%, while Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (PIPE) has a volatility of 5.41%. This indicates that RIFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PIPE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RIFR	PIPE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.04%	5.41%	-2.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.91%	12.00%	-3.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.81%	14.91%	-4.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.69%	18.62%	-7.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.69%	18.62%	-7.93%

RIFR vs. PIPE - Expense Ratio Comparison

RIFR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than PIPE's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

RIFR vs. PIPE - Dividend Comparison

RIFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than PIPE's 3.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
PIPE Invesco SteelPath MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	3.71%	3.74%
RIFR Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF	0.87%	0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RIFR and PIPE in my portfolio?

RIFR and PIPE have a correlation of 0.50, 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 PIPE?

PIPE has higher volatility (5.41%) compared to RIFR (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RIFR dropped -6.80% vs PIPE's -15.69%.

Which ETF is better, RIFR or PIPE?

On 1-year performance, PIPE leads with 32.12% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, RIFR or PIPE?

Over the 1-year period, PIPE has performed better with a 32.12% return vs 14.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RIFR or PIPE?

RIFR is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PIPE.

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

PIPE has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 0.87% for RIFR.

What is the main difference between RIFR and PIPE?

They also come from different issuers: Russell and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for RIFR and 0.75% for PIPE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIPE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 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.