RMGSX vs. RLVSX

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RMGSX (Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund) and RLVSX (Russell Investments Tax-Exempt Bond Fund) are both mutual funds - RMGSX is a Global Allocation fund managed by Russell, while RLVSX is a Municipal Bonds fund managed by Russell. Over the past 5 years, RMGSX returned 6.34%/yr vs 1.24%/yr for RLVSX. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RMGSX charges 0.91%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for RLVSX.

Performance

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - 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 Tax-Exempt Bond Fund (RLVSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RMGSX achieves a 7.62% return, which is significantly higher than RLVSX's 1.86% return.

RMGSX

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 0.48%
• YTD: 7.62%
• 6M: 7.89%
• 1Y: 18.48%
• 3Y*: 13.22%
• 5Y*: 6.34%
• 10Y*: —

RLVSX

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 1.30%
• YTD: 1.86%
• 6M: 2.00%
• 1Y: 6.05%
• 3Y*: 3.85%
• 5Y*: 1.24%
• 10Y*: 2.22%

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

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RMGSX Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund	7.62%	17.38%	8.76%	15.26%	-14.73%	7.88%	3.14%	9.22%	-4.92%	5.43%
RLVSX Russell Investments Tax-Exempt Bond Fund	1.86%	4.26%	1.76%	6.11%	-7.58%	2.03%	4.05%	7.38%	1.45%	3.16%

Correlation

The correlation between RMGSX and RLVSX is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2017	0.14

The correlation between RMGSX and RLVSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.34 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RMGSX vs. RLVSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

RMGSX

RMGSX Risk / Return Rank: 68
RMGSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
RMGSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
RMGSX Omega Ratio Rank: 74
RMGSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
RMGSX Martin Ratio Rank: 63

RLVSX

RLVSX Risk / Return Rank: 80
RLVSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
RLVSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
RLVSX Omega Ratio Rank: 97
RLVSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
RLVSX Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. RLVSX - 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 Tax-Exempt Bond Fund (RLVSX). 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.

	RMGSX	RLVSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	3.43	-1.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.26	5.12	-1.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.96	-0.52
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.71	2.80	-0.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.68	9.89	+1.78

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RMGSX Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is lower than the RLVSX Sharpe Ratio of 3.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RMGSX and RLVSX, 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

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RMGSX drawdown since its inception was -24.93%, which is greater than RLVSX's maximum drawdown of -11.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RMGSX and RLVSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	RMGSX	RLVSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.93%	-11.77%	-13.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.73%	-2.17%	-4.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.85%	-4.22%	-4.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.20%	-11.77%	-11.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-11.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	-0.13%	-0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.17%	-1.53%	-2.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.56%	0.61%	+0.95%

Volatility

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - Volatility Comparison

Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund (RMGSX) has a higher volatility of 3.01% compared to Russell Investments Tax-Exempt Bond Fund (RLVSX) at 0.48%. This indicates that RMGSX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RLVSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RMGSX	RLVSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.01%	0.48%	+2.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.49%	1.40%	+5.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.85%	1.77%	+6.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.35%	3.10%	+7.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.28%	3.33%	+6.95%

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

RMGSX has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is higher than RLVSX's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

RMGSX vs. RLVSX - Dividend Comparison

RMGSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.98%, more than RLVSX's 3.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RLVSX Russell Investments Tax-Exempt Bond Fund	3.51%	3.18%	3.57%	3.20%	2.73%	2.06%	2.58%	3.08%	2.89%	2.65%	2.64%	2.80%
RMGSX Russell Investments Multi-Asset Growth Strategy Fund	3.98%	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 RLVSX in my portfolio?

RMGSX and RLVSX have a correlation of 0.34, 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 RLVSX?

RMGSX has higher volatility (3.01%) compared to RLVSX (0.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RMGSX dropped -24.93% vs RLVSX's -11.77%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RLVSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.43 vs 2.32), 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.