DFAX vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

DFAX (Dimensional World ex US Core Equity 2 ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. DFAX is actively managed, while CIL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFAX returned 20.27%/yr vs 15.96%/yr for CIL. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFAX charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

DFAX vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional World ex US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAX) 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, DFAX achieves a 12.82% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return.

DFAX

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -0.69%
• YTD: 12.82%
• 6M: 12.55%
• 1Y: 29.76%
• 3Y*: 20.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CIL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.44%
• 6M: 5.21%
• 1Y: 16.11%
• 3Y*: 15.96%
• 5Y*: 7.55%
• 10Y*: 8.21%

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

DFAX vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAX Dimensional World ex US Core Equity 2 ETF	12.82%	35.42%	4.78%	16.66%	-14.48%	-2.10%
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	5.44%	32.99%	3.76%	16.29%	-16.00%	-1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAX and CIL is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021	0.77

The correlation between DFAX and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.83 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

DFAX vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAX	CIL
Technology	19.1%	6.4%
Financial Services	17.7%	24.8%
Industrials	17.4%	18.4%
Basic Materials	10.6%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	8.2%
Energy	6.1%	4.6%
Healthcare	5.8%	7.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	8.8%
Communication Services	4.3%	5.8%
Utilities	2.9%	6.6%
Real Estate	1.9%	2.2%

Return for Risk

DFAX vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFAX

DFAX Risk / Return Rank: 63
DFAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
DFAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
DFAX Omega Ratio Rank: 65
DFAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
DFAX Martin Ratio Rank: 64

CIL

CIL Risk / Return Rank: 83
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

DFAX vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional World ex US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAX) 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.

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.

	DFAX	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	2.21	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	3.25	-0.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.51	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.69	3.66	-0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.42	15.90	-5.49

DFAX vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAX Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAX 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.

Drawdowns

DFAX vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAX drawdown since its inception was -28.15%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAX and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAX	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.15%	-36.27%	+8.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.11%	-4.60%	-6.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.89%	-11.96%	-1.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.89%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.27%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.07%	-0.58%	-2.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.62%	-6.52%	-0.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	1.07%	+1.79%

Volatility

DFAX vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional World ex US Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAX) has a higher volatility of 7.02% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that DFAX'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

	DFAX	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.02%	0.00%	+7.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.13%	3.36%	+10.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.98%	7.63%	+8.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.16%	16.47%	-0.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.16%	17.07%	-0.91%

DFAX vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAX has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFAX vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

DFAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, more than CIL's 1.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	1.20%	2.70%	3.46%	2.91%	2.41%	3.04%	1.73%	2.69%	2.85%	2.17%	2.34%	0.43%
DFAX Dimensional World ex US Core Equity 2 ETF	2.35%	2.58%	2.98%	3.01%	3.30%	1.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAX and CIL in my portfolio?

DFAX and CIL have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFAX or CIL?

DFAX has higher volatility (7.02%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAX dropped -28.15% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, DFAX or CIL?

On 3-year performance, DFAX leads with 20.27% vs 15.96% for CIL. On fees, DFAX is cheaper at 0.28% 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, DFAX or CIL?

Over the 3-year period, DFAX has performed better with a 20.27% return vs 15.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAX or CIL?

DFAX is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

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

DFAX has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 1.20% for CIL.

What is the main difference between DFAX and CIL?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for DFAX and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.87), 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.