RMGSX vs. RFAYX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RMGSX (Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund) and RFAYX (Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund) are both mutual funds - RMGSX is a Global Allocation fund managed by Russell, while RFAYX is a Intermediate Core Bond fund managed by Russell. Over the past 5 years, RMGSX returned 5.94%/yr vs -0.39%/yr for RFAYX. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMGSX charges 0.91%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for RFAYX.

Performance

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund (RMGSX) and Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund (RFAYX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMGSX achieves a 7.70% return, which is significantly higher than RFAYX's 0.16% return.

RMGSX

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 1.44%
• YTD: 7.70%
• 6M: 8.40%
• 1Y: 18.57%
• 3Y*: 13.83%
• 5Y*: 5.94%
• 10Y*: —

RFAYX

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 0.07%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: 0.28%
• 1Y: 4.56%
• 3Y*: 3.89%
• 5Y*: -0.39%
• 10Y*: 1.57%

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

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RMGSX Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund	7.70%	17.38%	8.76%	15.26%	-14.73%	7.88%	3.14%	9.22%	-4.92%	5.43%
RFAYX Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund	0.16%	7.47%	1.57%	4.85%	-14.80%	-1.09%	9.10%	9.03%	-0.56%	2.54%

Correlation

The correlation between RMGSX and RFAYX is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2017	0.20

Over the past year, RMGSX and RFAYX have become more correlated (0.46) than their long-term average of 0.20, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

RMGSX vs. RFAYX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMGSX

RMGSX Risk / Return Rank: 72
RMGSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
RMGSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
RMGSX Omega Ratio Rank: 77
RMGSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
RMGSX Martin Ratio Rank: 66

RFAYX

RFAYX Risk / Return Rank: 26
RFAYX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
RFAYX Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
RFAYX Omega Ratio Rank: 25
RFAYX Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
RFAYX Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund (RMGSX) and Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund (RFAYX). 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.

	RMGSX	RFAYX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	1.43	+1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.66	2.16	+1.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.25	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.83	1.91	+0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.34	5.69	+6.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMGSX Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is higher than the RFAYX Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMGSX and RFAYX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RMGSX	RFAYX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	1.43	+1.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58	-0.07	+0.65
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.32	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	0.75	-0.21

Drawdowns

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMGSX drawdown since its inception was -24.93%, which is greater than RFAYX's maximum drawdown of -19.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMGSX and RFAYX.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMGSX	RFAYX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.93%	-19.61%	-5.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.73%	-2.73%	-4.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.85%	-6.32%	-2.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.47%	-19.61%	-3.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-19.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.31%	-4.21%	+3.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.18%	-2.98%	-1.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.54%	0.91%	+0.63%

Volatility

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Volatility Comparison

Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund (RMGSX) has a higher volatility of 2.21% compared to Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund (RFAYX) at 1.26%. This indicates that RMGSX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RFAYX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMGSX	RFAYX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.21%	1.26%	+0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.93%	2.52%	+3.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.43%	3.65%	+3.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.30%	5.90%	+4.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.27%	4.90%	+5.37%

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMGSX has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is higher than RFAYX's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMGSX vs. RFAYX - Dividend Comparison

RMGSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.97%, less than RFAYX's 5.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RFAYX Russell Investments Investment Grade Bond Fund	5.44%	5.19%	4.74%	3.71%	1.25%	2.50%	5.27%	3.46%	2.67%	1.57%	5.45%	4.09%
RMGSX Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund	3.97%	4.32%	3.60%	3.48%	0.76%	6.27%	0.80%	3.35%	2.46%	1.33%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RMGSX and RFAYX in my portfolio?

RMGSX and RFAYX have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RMGSX or RFAYX?

RMGSX has higher volatility (2.21%) compared to RFAYX (1.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMGSX dropped -24.93% vs RFAYX's -19.61%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RMGSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 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.