CIL vs. IFLO
CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) and IFLO (VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. Over the past year, CIL returned 14.79% vs 31.49% for IFLO. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CIL charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for IFLO.
Performance
CIL vs. IFLO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIL achieves a 5.44% return, which is significantly lower than IFLO's 18.32% return.
CIL
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 2.55%
- YTD
- 5.44%
- 1Y
- 14.79%
- 3Y*
- 14.44%
- 5Y*
- 7.49%
- 10Y*
- 8.36%
IFLO
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- -0.87%
- 6M
- 14.97%
- YTD
- 18.32%
- 1Y
- 31.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CIL vs. IFLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF | 5.44% | 10.27% |
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF | 18.32% | 13.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIL and IFLO is 0.57, 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 | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.58 |
The correlation between CIL and IFLO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.
CIL vs. IFLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CIL
IFLO
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Basic Materials
Technology
Communication Services
Energy
Real Estate
Financial Services
CIL
IFLO
Industrials
CIL
IFLO
Consumer Defensive
CIL
IFLO
Consumer Cyclical
CIL
IFLO
Healthcare
CIL
IFLO
Utilities
CIL
IFLO
Basic Materials
CIL
IFLO
Technology
CIL
IFLO
Communication Services
CIL
IFLO
Energy
CIL
IFLO
Real Estate
CIL
IFLO
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. IFLO — Risk / Return Rank
CIL
IFLO
CIL vs. IFLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) and VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO). 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.
| CIL | IFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.39 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.36 | 4.91 | -1.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.73 | 16.50 | -1.77 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CIL vs. IFLO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIL drawdown since its inception was -36.27%, which is greater than IFLO's maximum drawdown of -6.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIL and IFLO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIL | IFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.27% | -6.44% | -29.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.60% | -6.44% | +1.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.96% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.89% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.27% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.58% | -2.22% | +1.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.50% | -1.29% | -5.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.04% | 1.91% | -0.87% |
Volatility
CIL vs. IFLO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) is 0.00%, while VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) has a volatility of 4.77%. This indicates that CIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IFLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIL | IFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.00% | 4.77% | -4.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.89% | 12.05% | -9.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.43% | 14.71% | -7.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.44% | 14.61% | +1.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.80% | 14.61% | +2.19% |
CIL vs. IFLO - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than IFLO's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIL vs. IFLO - Dividend Comparison
CIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than IFLO's 1.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF | 1.05% | 2.70% | 3.46% | 2.91% | 2.41% | 3.04% | 1.73% | 2.69% | 2.85% | 2.17% | 2.34% | 0.43% |
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF | 1.57% | 0.73% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CIL and IFLO have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IFLO has higher volatility (4.77%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CIL dropped -36.27% vs IFLO's -6.44%.
On 1-year performance, IFLO leads with 31.49% vs 14.79% 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 1-year period, IFLO has performed better with a 31.49% return vs 14.79%. 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 0.56% for IFLO.
IFLO has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 1.05% for CIL.
They also come from different issuers: Crestview and VictoryShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CIL and 0.56% for IFLO.
IFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 2.08), 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 CIL and IFLO
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