XAGG vs. RMIF
XAGG (Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF) and RMIF (LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XAGG charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.38%/yr for RMIF.
Performance
XAGG vs. RMIF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XAGG achieves a 2.19% return, which is significantly higher than RMIF's -0.91% return.
XAGG
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- -0.34%
- 6M
- 0.48%
- YTD
- 2.19%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
RMIF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.38%
- 6M
- -0.95%
- YTD
- -0.91%
- 1Y
- 1.78%
- 3Y*
- 4.44%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 4.61%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.26M | $978.63K | $401.32K | |
| $9.69M | $13.10M | $11.08M |
XAGG vs. RMIF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XAGG Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF | 2.19% | 1.75% |
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF | -0.91% | 1.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between XAGG and RMIF is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2025 | 0.59 |
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
XAGG vs. RMIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF (XAGG) and LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF (RMIF). 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.
| XAGG | RMIF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.12 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.70 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 1.69 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XAGG vs. RMIF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XAGG drawdown since its inception was -2.88%, roughly equal to the maximum RMIF drawdown of -3.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XAGG and RMIF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XAGG | RMIF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.88% | -3.01% | +0.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.37% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -3.01% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.49% | -1.36% | +0.87% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.53% | -0.42% | -0.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.97% | — |
Volatility
XAGG vs. RMIF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XAGG | RMIF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.40% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 1.99% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.42% | 2.63% | +0.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.42% | 2.56% | +0.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.42% | 2.56% | +0.86% |
XAGG vs. RMIF - Expense Ratio Comparison
XAGG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than RMIF's 1.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
XAGG vs. RMIF - Dividend Comparison
XAGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.07%, while RMIF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RMIF LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF | 4.82% | 5.70% | 6.61% | 3.70% |
XAGG Eaton Vance Income Opportunities ETF | 5.07% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XAGG and RMIF have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XAGG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XAGG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.38% for RMIF.
XAGG has the higher dividend yield at 5.07%, compared with 4.82% for RMIF.
They also come from different issuers: Eaton Vance and Little Harbor Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XAGG and 1.38% for RMIF.
Find the right allocation for XAGG and RMIF
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