CIL vs. IMTM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) and IMTM (iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CIL is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index, while IMTM is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI World ex USA Momentum. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CIL returned 8.21%/yr vs 10.29%/yr for IMTM. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CIL charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for IMTM.

Performance

CIL vs. IMTM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) and iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIL achieves a 5.44% return, which is significantly lower than IMTM's 11.05% return. Over the past 10 years, CIL has underperformed IMTM with an annualized return of 8.21%, while IMTM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.29% annualized 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%

IMTM

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 4.43%
• YTD: 11.05%
• 6M: 14.04%
• 1Y: 23.92%
• 3Y*: 21.55%
• 5Y*: 9.00%
• 10Y*: 10.29%

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

CIL vs. IMTM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
IMTM iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF	11.05%	34.50%	12.17%	13.89%	-16.81%	3.50%	22.17%	24.52%	-14.31%	25.46%

Correlation

The correlation between CIL and IMTM is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015	0.67

The correlation between CIL and IMTM shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.81 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CIL vs. IMTM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CIL	IMTM
Financial Services	24.8%	29.6%
Industrials	18.4%	17.5%
Consumer Defensive	8.8%	2.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.2%	1.8%
Healthcare	7.7%	9.0%
Utilities	6.6%	6.4%
Basic Materials	6.6%	9.3%
Technology	6.4%	11.4%
Communication Services	5.8%	1.9%
Energy	4.6%	9.4%
Real Estate	2.2%	1.2%

Return for Risk

CIL vs. IMTM — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

IMTM

IMTM Risk / Return Rank: 40
IMTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
IMTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
IMTM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
IMTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
IMTM Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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. IMTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) and iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM). 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.

	CIL	IMTM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.24	1.41	+0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	2.07	+1.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.26	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.95	1.87	+2.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.75	7.46	+9.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CIL vs. IMTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIL Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is higher than the IMTM Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIL and IMTM, 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

	CIL	IMTM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.24	1.41	+0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.51	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	0.58	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.50	-0.07

Drawdowns

CIL vs. IMTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIL drawdown since its inception was -36.27%, which is greater than IMTM's maximum drawdown of -32.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIL and IMTM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CIL	IMTM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.27%	-32.66%	-3.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.60%	-12.85%	+8.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.96%	-12.85%	+0.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.89%	-32.66%	+2.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.27%	-32.66%	-3.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.58%	-0.39%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.56%	-7.45%	+0.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.07%	3.21%	-2.14%

Volatility

CIL vs. IMTM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) is 0.00%, while iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) has a volatility of 5.48%. This indicates that CIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMTM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CIL	IMTM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.00%	5.48%	-5.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.23%	14.98%	-10.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.19%	17.04%	-8.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.49%	17.64%	-1.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.17%	17.64%	-0.47%

CIL vs. IMTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than IMTM's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

CIL vs. IMTM - Dividend Comparison

CIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%, less than IMTM's 4.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
IMTM iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF	4.23%	4.70%	2.93%	2.29%	2.68%	2.51%	0.97%	2.13%	2.36%	1.92%	2.75%	1.56%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CIL and IMTM in my portfolio?

CIL and IMTM have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CIL or IMTM?

IMTM has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CIL dropped -36.27% vs IMTM's -32.66%.

Which ETF is better, CIL or IMTM?

On 10-year performance, IMTM leads with 10.29% vs 8.21% for CIL. On fees, IMTM is cheaper at 0.30% 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, CIL or IMTM?

Over the 10-year period, IMTM has performed better with a 10.29% return vs 8.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CIL or IMTM?

IMTM is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

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

IMTM has the higher dividend yield at 4.23%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

What is the main difference between CIL and IMTM?

CIL is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while IMTM is Momentum. CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index, while IMTM tracks MSCI World ex USA Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Crestview and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CIL and 0.30% for IMTM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.41), 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.