CFO vs. LGLV
CFO (VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF) and LGLV (SPDR SSGA US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF) are both Low Volatility funds - CFO tracks the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index while LGLV tracks the State Street U.S. Large Cap Low Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CFO returned 9.55%/yr vs 11.19%/yr for LGLV. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. CFO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for LGLV.
Performance
CFO vs. LGLV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CFO achieves a 10.37% return, which is significantly higher than LGLV's 7.61% return. Over the past 10 years, CFO has underperformed LGLV with an annualized return of 9.55%, while LGLV has yielded a comparatively higher 11.19% annualized return.
CFO
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- 6M
- 7.16%
- YTD
- 10.37%
- 1Y
- 15.46%
- 3Y*
- 10.18%
- 5Y*
- 4.08%
- 10Y*
- 9.55%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.79%
LGLV
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.47%
- 6M
- 3.70%
- YTD
- 7.61%
- 1Y
- 10.51%
- 3Y*
- 11.84%
- 5Y*
- 8.32%
- 10Y*
- 11.19%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.95%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $401.90K | $354.93K | $366.84K | |
| $5.56M | $4.60M | $5.45M |
CFO vs. LGLV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF | 10.37% | 8.60% | 15.37% | -3.56% | -14.46% | 26.02% | 19.84% | 21.64% | -8.81% | 22.65% |
LGLV SPDR SSGA US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF | 7.61% | 8.37% | 16.22% | 9.19% | -8.17% | 27.95% | 7.42% | 30.83% | 0.32% | 17.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between CFO and LGLV is 0.78, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.85 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2014 | 0.82 |
The correlation between CFO and LGLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
CFO vs. LGLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CFO
LGLV
Industrials
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Real Estate
Industrials
CFO
LGLV
Financial Services
CFO
LGLV
Technology
CFO
LGLV
Healthcare
CFO
LGLV
Consumer Cyclical
CFO
LGLV
Utilities
CFO
LGLV
Consumer Defensive
CFO
LGLV
Energy
CFO
LGLV
Basic Materials
CFO
LGLV
Communication Services
CFO
LGLV
Real Estate
CFO
LGLV
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CFO vs. LGLV — Risk / Return Rank
CFO
LGLV
CFO vs. LGLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and SPDR SSGA US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF (LGLV). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| CFO | LGLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.17 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.03 | 1.47 | +0.56 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.64 | 3.41 | +4.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CFO vs. LGLV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CFO drawdown since its inception was -24.35%, smaller than the maximum LGLV drawdown of -36.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFO and LGLV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CFO | LGLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.35% | -36.64% | +12.29% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.10% | -6.86% | -0.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.25% | -10.17% | -7.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.35% | -17.49% | -6.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.35% | -36.64% | +12.29% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | -2.14% | +0.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.55% | -3.21% | -2.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.88% | 2.95% | -1.07% |
Volatility
CFO vs. LGLV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) is 2.67%, while SPDR SSGA US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF (LGLV) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that CFO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LGLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CFO | LGLV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.67% | 4.53% | -1.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.84% | 7.99% | -0.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.77% | 10.16% | +0.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.29% | 13.03% | +0.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.17% | 16.09% | -2.92% |
CFO vs. LGLV - Expense Ratio Comparison
CFO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than LGLV's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
CFO vs. LGLV - Dividend Comparison
CFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, less than LGLV's 1.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF | 1.22% | 1.32% | 1.44% | 1.72% | 3.95% | 1.06% | 0.90% | 1.44% | 1.49% | 1.18% | 1.35% | 1.31% |
LGLV SPDR SSGA US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF | 1.99% | 1.94% | 1.93% | 2.03% | 1.95% | 1.65% | 1.98% | 1.89% | 2.09% | 4.39% | 2.54% | 2.97% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CFO and LGLV have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LGLV has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to CFO (2.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFO dropped -24.35% vs LGLV's -36.64%.
On 10-year performance, LGLV leads with 11.19% vs 9.55% for CFO. On fees, LGLV is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, CFO has been the lower-risk option at 2.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, LGLV has performed better with a 11.19% return vs 9.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LGLV is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CFO.
LGLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 1.22% for CFO.
CFO tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while LGLV tracks State Street U.S. Large Cap Low Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CFO and 0.12% for LGLV.
CFO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs 0.99), 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.
Find the right allocation for CFO and LGLV
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer