CFO vs. CFA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CFO (VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF) and CFA (VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds from VictoryShares - CFO tracks the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index while CFA tracks the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CFO returned 9.36%/yr vs 11.41%/yr for CFA. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

CFO vs. CFA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

As of year-to-date, both investments have demonstrated similar returns, with CFO at 6.66% and CFA at 6.66%. Over the past 10 years, CFO has underperformed CFA with an annualized return of 9.36%, while CFA has yielded a comparatively higher 11.41% annualized return.

CFO

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 1.87%
• YTD: 6.66%
• 6M: 6.96%
• 1Y: 13.59%
• 3Y*: 10.44%
• 5Y*: 3.88%
• 10Y*: 9.36%

CFA

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 1.81%
• YTD: 6.66%
• 6M: 6.96%
• 1Y: 13.49%
• 3Y*: 13.78%
• 5Y*: 7.77%
• 10Y*: 11.41%

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

CFO vs. CFA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF	6.66%	8.60%	15.37%	-3.56%	-14.46%	26.02%	19.84%	21.64%	-8.81%	22.65%
CFA VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF	6.66%	8.63%	15.34%	11.85%	-11.39%	26.09%	11.98%	30.15%	-8.62%	22.47%

Correlation

The correlation between CFO and CFA is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.99
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2014	0.93

The correlation between CFO and CFA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

CFO vs. CFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CFO	CFA
Industrials	18.4%	18.4%
Financial Services	18.3%	18.3%
Technology	14.9%	14.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	9.8%
Healthcare	9.5%	9.5%
Utilities	9.0%	9.0%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	6.8%
Energy	5.5%	5.5%
Basic Materials	3.6%	3.6%
Communication Services	3.6%	3.6%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.5%

Return for Risk

CFO vs. CFA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CFO

CFO Risk / Return Rank: 38
CFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
CFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
CFO Omega Ratio Rank: 34
CFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
CFO Martin Ratio Rank: 44

CFA

CFA Risk / Return Rank: 37
CFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
CFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
CFA Omega Ratio Rank: 33
CFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
CFA Martin Ratio Rank: 43

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.

CFO vs. CFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA). 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.

	CFO	CFA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	1.27	0.00
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	1.89	-0.01
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.22	0.00
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	1.90	+0.02
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.10	7.03	+0.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CFO vs. CFA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFO Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is comparable to the CFA Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFO and CFA, 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

	CFO	CFA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.27	1.27	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	0.52	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.71	0.66	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.62	+0.03

Drawdowns

CFO vs. CFA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFO drawdown since its inception was -24.35%, smaller than the maximum CFA drawdown of -37.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFO and CFA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CFO	CFA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.35%	-37.74%	+13.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.10%	-7.13%	+0.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.25%	-17.28%	+0.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.35%	-20.88%	-3.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.35%	-37.74%	+13.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.30%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.62%	-4.17%	-1.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	1.92%	0.00%

Volatility

CFO vs. CFA - Volatility Comparison

VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF (CFA) have volatilities of 2.42% and 2.40%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CFO	CFA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.42%	2.40%	+0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.79%	7.82%	-0.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.75%	10.70%	+0.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.32%	15.06%	-1.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.27%	17.21%	-3.94%

CFO vs. CFA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CFO and CFA have an expense ratio of 0.35%.

Dividends

CFO vs. CFA - Dividend Comparison

CFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, which matches CFA's 1.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CFA VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Weighted ETF	1.24%	1.29%	1.32%	1.42%	1.59%	1.04%	1.21%	1.35%	1.50%	1.15%	1.37%	1.31%
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF	1.24%	1.32%	1.44%	1.72%	3.95%	1.06%	0.90%	1.44%	1.49%	1.18%	1.35%	1.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CFO and CFA in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.99, CFO and CFA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CFO or CFA?

CFO has higher volatility (2.42%) compared to CFA (2.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFO dropped -24.35% vs CFA's -37.74%.

Which ETF is better, CFO or CFA?

On 10-year performance, CFA leads with 11.41% vs 9.36% for CFO. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CFO or CFA?

Over the 10-year period, CFA has performed better with a 11.41% return vs 9.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CFO or CFA?

CFO and CFA have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CFO or CFA?

CFO and CFA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.24%.

What is the main difference between CFO and CFA?

CFO tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while CFA tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Volatility Weighted Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CFO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs 1.27), 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.