Screener
RIFR vs IGF
Russell Investments Global Infrastructure ETF vs iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
Key differences
- IGF costs 0.20% less per year.
- IGF is significantly larger than RIFR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- RIFR follows a active selection strategy; IGF uses index tracking.
- IGF has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| RIFR | IGF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.59% | 0.39% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $42M | $10.7B |
| Since | 2025 | 2007 |
| Dividend yield | — | 2.89% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global | global |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +16.0% | +19.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +15.7% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +10.7% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.93 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.46% | 10.43% |
| Max drawdown | -6.80% | -42.11% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to RIFR and IGF
Explore further