AFK vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

AFK (VanEck Vectors Africa Index ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - AFK tracks the Dow Jones Africa Titans 50 Index while CIL tracks the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AFK returned 5.75%/yr vs 8.21%/yr for CIL. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AFK charges 0.78%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

AFK vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Africa Index ETF (AFK) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AFK achieves a 3.48% return, which is significantly lower than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, AFK has underperformed CIL with an annualized return of 5.75%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively higher 8.21% annualized return.

AFK

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: 3.28%
• YTD: 3.48%
• 6M: 13.04%
• 1Y: 44.31%
• 3Y*: 23.18%
• 5Y*: 6.45%
• 10Y*: 5.75%

CIL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.44%
• 6M: 8.27%
• 1Y: 16.20%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: 7.45%
• 10Y*: 8.21%

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

AFK vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AFK VanEck Vectors Africa Index ETF	3.48%	74.71%	12.10%	-12.11%	-17.31%	3.00%	4.26%	9.90%	-19.55%	28.22%
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	5.44%	32.99%	3.76%	16.29%	-16.00%	11.07%	7.21%	19.13%	-13.34%	27.67%

Correlation

The correlation between AFK and CIL is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.49
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015	0.46

The correlation between AFK and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.49 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AFK vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AFK	CIL
Financial Services	37.7%	24.8%
Basic Materials	32.5%	6.6%
Communication Services	12.5%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	6.5%	8.2%
Energy	4.7%	4.6%
Industrials	3.7%	18.4%
Consumer Defensive	1.6%	8.8%
Healthcare	0.5%	7.7%
Real Estate	0.2%	2.2%
Utilities	0.2%	6.6%
Technology	-	6.4%

Return for Risk

AFK vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

AFK

AFK Risk / Return Rank: 48
AFK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
AFK Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
AFK Omega Ratio Rank: 50
AFK Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
AFK Martin Ratio Rank: 45

CIL

CIL Risk / Return Rank: 73
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 73
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

AFK vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Africa Index ETF (AFK) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL). 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.

	AFK	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	2.07	-0.32
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	2.96	-0.74
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.45	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.44	4.32	-1.88
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.38	18.62	-11.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AFK vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AFK Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AFK and CIL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AFK	CIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.74	2.07	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	0.46	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.26	0.48	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.01	0.43	-0.42

Drawdowns

AFK vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AFK drawdown since its inception was -62.46%, which is greater than CIL's maximum drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFK and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	AFK	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.46%	-36.27%	-26.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.54%	-4.60%	-14.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.54%	-11.96%	-7.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.46%	-29.89%	-8.57%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-53.33%	-36.27%	-17.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.42%	-0.58%	-8.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.04%	-6.56%	-25.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.45%	1.07%	+5.38%

Volatility

AFK vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Africa Index ETF (AFK) has a higher volatility of 8.12% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that AFK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AFK	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.12%	0.00%	+8.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.33%	4.42%	+17.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.62%	8.26%	+17.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.07%	16.49%	+5.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.16%	17.18%	+4.98%

AFK vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

AFK has a 0.78% expense ratio, which is higher than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

AFK vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

AFK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, less than CIL's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AFK VanEck Vectors Africa Index ETF	0.98%	1.02%	0.00%	2.27%	3.59%	4.17%	3.91%	6.34%	1.71%	1.99%	2.67%	2.16%
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	1.67%	2.70%	3.46%	2.91%	2.41%	3.04%	1.73%	2.69%	2.85%	2.17%	2.34%	0.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AFK and CIL in my portfolio?

AFK and CIL have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AFK or CIL?

AFK has higher volatility (8.12%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFK dropped -62.46% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, AFK or CIL?

On 10-year performance, CIL leads with 8.21% vs 5.75% for AFK. On fees, CIL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AFK or CIL?

Over the 10-year period, CIL has performed better with a 8.21% return vs 5.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AFK or CIL?

CIL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.78% for AFK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AFK or CIL?

CIL has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 0.98% for AFK.

What is the main difference between AFK and CIL?

AFK tracks Dow Jones Africa Titans 50 Index, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.78% for AFK and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.74), 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.