RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

RIRA.TO (Russell Investments Real Assets) and FBAL.NEO (Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RIRA.TO is a Infrastructure Equities fund actively managed by Russell Investments Canada Limited, while FBAL.NEO is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RIRA.TO returned 7.83%/yr vs 9.35%/yr for FBAL.NEO. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RIRA.TO charges 1.31%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for FBAL.NEO.

Performance

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Russell Investments Real Assets (RIRA.TO) and Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RIRA.TO achieves a 18.72% return, which is significantly higher than FBAL.NEO's 7.93% return.

RIRA.TO

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 2.78%
• 6M: 13.99%
• YTD: 18.72%
• 1Y: 26.17%
• 3Y*: 11.94%
• 5Y*: 7.83%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.36%

FBAL.NEO

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 0.19%
• 6M: 5.44%
• YTD: 7.93%
• 1Y: 15.28%
• 3Y*: 15.53%
• 5Y*: 9.35%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.79%

*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)
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	CA$12.18M	CA$11.64M	CA$16.06M
RIRA.TO Russell Investments Real Assets	CA$30.02K	CA$31.90K	CA$47.40K

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
RIRA.TO Russell Investments Real Assets	18.72%	10.46%	8.03%	4.50%	-8.47%	17.33%
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	7.93%	12.92%	19.42%	13.96%	-9.60%	11.51%

Correlation

The correlation between RIRA.TO and FBAL.NEO is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2021	0.35

Return for Risk

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

RIRA.TO

RIRA.TO Risk / Return Rank: 95
RIRA.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
RIRA.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
RIRA.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RIRA.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
RIRA.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

FBAL.NEO

FBAL.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 78
FBAL.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
FBAL.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FBAL.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 79
FBAL.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
FBAL.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Real Assets (RIRA.TO) and Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO). 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.

	RIRA.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.88	1.83	+1.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.03	2.63	+1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.34	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.98	2.49	+3.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.53	10.13	+11.40

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RIRA.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.88, which is higher than the FBAL.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RIRA.TO and FBAL.NEO, 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

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RIRA.TO drawdown since its inception was -25.82%, which is greater than FBAL.NEO's maximum drawdown of -16.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RIRA.TO and FBAL.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	RIRA.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.82%	-16.23%	-9.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.40%	-6.17%	+1.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.05%	-8.29%	-3.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.56%	-16.23%	-0.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.52%	+1.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.12%	-3.20%	-2.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.22%	1.51%	-0.29%

Volatility

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Russell Investments Real Assets (RIRA.TO) is 2.03%, while Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) has a volatility of 2.53%. This indicates that RIRA.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBAL.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RIRA.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.03%	2.53%	-0.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.56%	6.90%	-0.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.12%	8.40%	+0.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.70%	8.58%	+4.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.83%	8.52%	+5.31%

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

RIRA.TO has a 1.31% expense ratio, which is higher than FBAL.NEO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

RIRA.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Dividend Comparison

RIRA.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.78%, more than FBAL.NEO's 1.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	1.49%	1.61%	1.42%	1.71%	1.57%	1.08%	0.00%
RIRA.TO Russell Investments Real Assets	3.78%	4.27%	4.31%	6.16%	6.34%	3.95%	4.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RIRA.TO and FBAL.NEO in my portfolio?

RIRA.TO and FBAL.NEO have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RIRA.TO or FBAL.NEO?

On fees, FBAL.NEO is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RIRA.TO or FBAL.NEO?

FBAL.NEO is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for RIRA.TO.

What is the main difference between RIRA.TO and FBAL.NEO?

RIRA.TO is categorized as Infrastructure Equities, while FBAL.NEO is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: Russell Investments Canada Limited and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 1.31% for RIRA.TO and 0.40% for FBAL.NEO.