CFO vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CFO (VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CFO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while CIL is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CFO returned 9.36%/yr vs 8.21%/yr for CIL. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CFO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

CFO vs. CIL - 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 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, CFO achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, CFO has outperformed CIL with an annualized return of 9.36%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively lower 8.21% 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%

CIL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.44%
• 6M: 7.94%
• 1Y: 17.37%
• 3Y*: 15.59%
• 5Y*: 7.45%
• 10Y*: 8.21%

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

CFO vs. CIL - 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%
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 CFO and CIL is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015	0.56

The correlation between CFO and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.62 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CFO vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CFO	CIL
Industrials	18.4%	18.4%
Financial Services	18.3%	24.8%
Technology	14.9%	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	8.2%
Healthcare	9.5%	7.7%
Utilities	9.0%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	8.8%
Energy	5.5%	4.6%
Basic Materials	3.6%	6.6%
Communication Services	3.6%	5.8%
Real Estate	0.5%	2.2%

Return for Risk

CFO vs. CIL — 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

CIL

CIL Risk / Return Rank: 76
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. CIL - 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 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.

	CFO	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	2.24	-0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	3.22	-1.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.49	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	3.95	-2.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.10	16.75	-9.65
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. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFO Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFO 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

	CFO	CIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.27	2.24	-0.97
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	0.71	0.48	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.43	+0.22

Drawdowns

CFO vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFO drawdown since its inception was -24.35%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFO and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	CFO	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.35%	-36.27%	+11.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.10%	-4.60%	-2.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.25%	-11.96%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.35%	-29.89%	+5.54%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.35%	-36.27%	+11.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.58%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.62%	-6.56%	+0.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	1.07%	+0.85%

Volatility

CFO vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) has a higher volatility of 2.42% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that CFO'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

	CFO	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.42%	0.00%	+2.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.79%	4.23%	+3.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.75%	8.19%	+2.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.32%	16.49%	-3.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.27%	17.17%	-3.90%

CFO vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

CFO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

CFO vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

CFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, less than CIL's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
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 CFO and CIL in my portfolio?

CFO and CIL have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CFO or CIL?

CFO has higher volatility (2.42%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFO dropped -24.35% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, CFO or CIL?

On 10-year performance, CFO leads with 9.36% vs 8.21% for CIL. On fees, CFO is cheaper at 0.35% 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, CFO or CIL?

Over the 10-year period, CFO has performed better with a 9.36% return vs 8.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CFO or CIL?

CFO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

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

CIL has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 1.24% for CFO.

What is the main difference between CFO and CIL?

CFO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while CIL is Foreign Large Cap Equities. CFO tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CFO and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 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.