PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RLY vs. AOA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RLY vs. AOA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF (AOA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RLY achieves a 15.29% return, which is significantly higher than AOA's 10.08% return. Over the past 10 years, RLY has underperformed AOA with an annualized return of 8.16%, while AOA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.24% annualized return.


RLY

1D
-0.42%
1M
3.64%
6M
8.40%
YTD
15.29%
1Y
27.11%
3Y*
12.93%
5Y*
10.64%
10Y*
8.16%
ALL TIME*
4.75%

AOA

1D
0.88%
1M
0.63%
6M
6.83%
YTD
10.08%
1Y
20.64%
3Y*
16.44%
5Y*
8.87%
10Y*
10.24%
ALL TIME*
10.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$10.91M$10.17M$10.41M
$5.13M$7.99M$7.88M

RLY vs. AOA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RLY
State Street Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
15.29%20.26%2.53%2.56%7.86%22.85%-0.59%15.63%-11.72%10.40%
AOA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF
10.08%19.59%13.55%18.27%-16.23%15.42%12.82%22.60%-7.86%20.05%

Correlation

The correlation between RLY and AOA is 0.39, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


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

0.39

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.53

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.61

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 26, 2012

0.70

Over the past year, the correlation between RLY and AOA has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.70, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

RLY vs. AOA — Risk / Return Rank

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

RLY
RLY Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
RLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLY Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
RLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLY Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

AOA
AOA Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
AOA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AOA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
AOA Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
AOA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
AOA Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

RLY vs. AOA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF (AOA). 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.


RLYAOADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.98

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.33

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.61

2.53

+1.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.56

10.66

+1.90

RLY vs. AOA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RLY Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is higher than the AOA Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RLY and AOA, 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

RLY vs. AOA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RLY drawdown since its inception was -37.75%, which is greater than AOA's maximum drawdown of -28.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RLY and AOA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RLYAOADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.75%

-28.38%

-9.37%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.54%

-8.20%

+0.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.08%

-12.94%

+2.86%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.94%

-23.62%

+4.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.17%

-28.38%

-5.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.15%

-0.36%

-2.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.40%

-4.03%

-5.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.16%

1.94%

+0.22%

Volatility

RLY vs. AOA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) is 2.61%, while iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF (AOA) has a volatility of 3.26%. This indicates that RLY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AOA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RLYAOADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.61%

3.26%

-0.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.06%

9.63%

-1.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.61%

11.49%

-0.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.46%

13.11%

+0.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.80%

13.51%

+0.29%

RLY vs. AOA - Expense Ratio Comparison

RLY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than AOA's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

RLY vs. AOA - Dividend Comparison

RLY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.07%, more than AOA's 2.11% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AOA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF
2.11%2.18%2.30%2.22%2.10%1.67%1.71%2.50%2.37%5.09%2.26%2.15%
RLY
State Street Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
3.07%3.24%3.31%3.71%5.66%12.15%2.16%3.45%2.76%1.85%2.07%1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions


RLY and AOA have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AOA has higher volatility (3.26%) compared to RLY (2.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RLY dropped -37.75% vs AOA's -28.38%.

On 10-year performance, AOA leads with 10.24% vs 8.16% for RLY. On fees, AOA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, RLY has been the lower-risk option at 2.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AOA has performed better with a 10.24% return vs 8.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AOA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for RLY.

RLY has the higher dividend yield at 3.07%, compared with 2.11% for AOA.

RLY is categorized as Global Allocation, while AOA is Diversified Portfolio. RLY tracks Bloomberg U.S. Government Inflation-Linked Bond Index, while AOA tracks S&P Target Risk Aggressive Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for RLY and 0.15% for AOA.

RLY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 1.81), 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 RLY and AOA

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