AGGS vs RMIF
Harbor Disciplined Bond ETF vs LHA Risk-Managed Income ETF
Which is better, AGGS or RMIF?
Each has led over a different period.
AGGS has a lower expense ratio. AGGS led over the full window, RMIF over 1Y.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AGGS | RMIF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35%Best | 1.55% |
| AUM | $38M | $6M |
| Dividend Yield | 5.38% | 5.68% |
| Holdings | 581 | 7 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.2% | 2.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -4.7% | -3.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.2 years | $11,173Best | $10,561 |
| Fund Family | Harbor Funds | Little Harbor Advisors |
| Category | Fixed Income | Fixed Income |
| Style | Intermediate Term Bond | Intermediate Term Bond |
| Inception | May 1, 2024 | Jun 9, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
The two price series end 79 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. AGGS has data through Oct 14, 2026 and RMIF through Jul 27, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 2, 2024 to Jul 27, 2026 (2.2 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AGGS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 4.2% compared with 2.5% for RMIF. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -4.7% for AGGS and -3.7% for RMIF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.51. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AGGS charges 0.35% per year while RMIF charges 1.55%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $155 annually, a gap of $120 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AGGS currently yields 5.38% against 5.68% for RMIF.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 128 holdings in AGGS and 6 in RMIF, totalling 45.2% and 100.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
The two holdings books were reported 138 days apart, AGGS as of Sep 15, 2026 and RMIF as of Apr 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
0 positions in common, counted across the 128 positions we hold weights for in AGGS and 6 in RMIF, against full books of 581 and 7.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of AGGS and RMIF you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AGGS or RMIF?
AGGS has an expense ratio of 0.35% while RMIF charges 1.55%. AGGS is the cheaper option, by $120 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, AGGS or RMIF?
AGGS has been the more volatile fund at 4.2% annualized versus 2.5% for RMIF. Worst drawdown: AGGS -4.7% vs RMIF -3.7%.
Should I hold both AGGS and RMIF?
AGGS and RMIF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.51, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, AGGS or RMIF?
AGGS yields 5.38% while RMIF yields 5.68%, so RMIF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RMIF better than AGGS?
AGGS has a lower expense ratio. AGGS led over the full window, RMIF over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.