PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CIL vs. ICOW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CIL vs. ICOW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) and Pacer Developed Markets International Cash Cows 100 ETF (ICOW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIL achieves a 5.44% return, which is significantly lower than ICOW's 17.35% return.


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%

ICOW

1D
-0.64%
1M
3.47%
YTD
17.35%
6M
18.06%
1Y
39.15%
3Y*
20.17%
5Y*
10.06%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CIL vs. ICOW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CIL
VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF
5.44%32.99%3.76%16.29%-16.00%11.07%7.21%19.13%-13.34%9.23%
ICOW
Pacer Developed Markets International Cash Cows 100 ETF
17.35%36.95%-2.59%18.94%-7.98%11.52%7.20%17.91%-16.09%16.98%

Correlation

The correlation between CIL and ICOW is 0.59, 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

0.59

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2017

0.69

The correlation between CIL and ICOW shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.78 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CIL vs. ICOW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CIL
ICOW

Financial Services

24.8%

-

Industrials

18.4%
28.7%

Consumer Defensive

8.8%
8.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.2%
11.6%

Healthcare

7.7%
7.1%

Utilities

6.6%

-

Basic Materials

6.6%
5.4%

Technology

6.4%
6.2%

Communication Services

5.8%
8.9%

Energy

4.6%
23.7%

Real Estate

2.2%

-

Financial Services

CIL
24.8%
ICOW

-

Industrials

CIL
18.4%
ICOW
28.7%

Consumer Defensive

CIL
8.8%
ICOW
8.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CIL
8.2%
ICOW
11.6%

Healthcare

CIL
7.7%
ICOW
7.1%

Utilities

CIL
6.6%
ICOW

-

Basic Materials

CIL
6.6%
ICOW
5.4%

Technology

CIL
6.4%
ICOW
6.2%

Communication Services

CIL
5.8%
ICOW
8.9%

Energy

CIL
4.6%
ICOW
23.7%

Real Estate

CIL
2.2%
ICOW

-

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

CIL vs. ICOW — Risk / Return Rank

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

CIL
CIL Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

ICOW
ICOW Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
ICOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICOW Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
ICOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICOW Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CIL vs. ICOW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) and Pacer Developed Markets International Cash Cows 100 ETF (ICOW). 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.


CILICOWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.50

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.95

4.91

-0.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.75

17.54

-0.78

CIL vs. ICOW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIL Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is comparable to the ICOW Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIL and ICOW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CILICOWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.24

2.87

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

0.61

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.55

-0.12

Drawdowns

CIL vs. ICOW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIL drawdown since its inception was -36.27%, smaller than the maximum ICOW drawdown of -43.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIL and ICOW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CILICOWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.27%

-43.49%

+7.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.60%

-8.02%

+3.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.96%

-14.81%

+2.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.89%

-28.48%

-1.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.58%

-0.64%

+0.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.56%

-7.59%

+1.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.07%

2.24%

-1.17%

Volatility

CIL vs. ICOW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) is 0.00%, while Pacer Developed Markets International Cash Cows 100 ETF (ICOW) has a volatility of 4.41%. This indicates that CIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICOW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CILICOWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.00%

4.41%

-4.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.23%

10.59%

-6.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.19%

13.73%

-5.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.49%

16.64%

-0.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.17%

18.47%

-1.30%

CIL vs. ICOW - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than ICOW's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

CIL vs. ICOW - Dividend Comparison

CIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, less than ICOW's 2.12% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
ICOW
Pacer Developed Markets International Cash Cows 100 ETF
2.12%3.03%4.39%3.61%5.26%2.11%2.46%3.10%2.61%0.80%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CIL and ICOW have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ICOW has higher volatility (4.41%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CIL dropped -36.27% vs ICOW's -43.49%.

On 5-year performance, ICOW leads with 10.06% vs 7.45% for CIL. 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.

Over the 5-year period, ICOW has performed better with a 10.06% return vs 7.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CIL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ICOW.

ICOW has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index, while ICOW tracks Pacer Developed Markets International Cash Cows 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Crestview and Pacer. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CIL and 0.65% for ICOW.

ICOW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.24), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CIL and ICOW

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