Screener
ICLN vs RIFR
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF vs Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF
Key differences
- ICLN costs 0.20% less per year.
- ICLN is significantly larger than RIFR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- ICLN follows a index tracking strategy; RIFR uses active selection.
- ICLN has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| ICLN | RIFR | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.39% | 0.59% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $2.5B | $42M |
| Since | 2008 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | 1.30% | — |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global | global |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +78.6% | +16.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +7.5% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +2.3% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.27 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 25.99% | 10.46% |
| Max drawdown | -66.75% | -6.80% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to ICLN and RIFR
Explore further