EFAD vs. IFLO
EFAD (ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF) and IFLO (VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. Over the past year, EFAD returned 4.19% vs 31.49% for IFLO. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EFAD charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for IFLO.
Performance
EFAD vs. IFLO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFAD achieves a 3.52% return, which is significantly lower than IFLO's 18.32% return.
EFAD
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- 0.54%
- 6M
- 1.19%
- YTD
- 3.52%
- 1Y
- 4.19%
- 3Y*
- 6.92%
- 5Y*
- 0.58%
- 10Y*
- 4.26%
IFLO
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- -0.87%
- 6M
- 14.97%
- YTD
- 18.32%
- 1Y
- 31.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EFAD vs. IFLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EFAD ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF | 3.52% | 0.65% |
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF | 18.32% | 13.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between EFAD and IFLO is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.81 |
The correlation between EFAD and IFLO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.
EFAD vs. IFLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EFAD
IFLO
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Energy
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
EFAD
IFLO
Technology
EFAD
IFLO
Industrials
EFAD
IFLO
Financial Services
EFAD
IFLO
Consumer Defensive
EFAD
IFLO
Basic Materials
EFAD
IFLO
Utilities
EFAD
IFLO
Communication Services
EFAD
IFLO
Real Estate
EFAD
IFLO
Energy
EFAD
IFLO
Consumer Cyclical
EFAD
-
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
EFAD vs. IFLO — Risk / Return Rank
EFAD
IFLO
EFAD vs. IFLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF (EFAD) 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.
| EFAD | IFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.39 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.41 | 4.91 | -4.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.35 | 16.50 | -15.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EFAD vs. IFLO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFAD drawdown since its inception was -35.74%, which is greater than IFLO's maximum drawdown of -6.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFAD and IFLO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFAD | IFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.74% | -6.44% | -29.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.18% | -6.44% | -3.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.74% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.74% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.24% | -2.22% | -0.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.33% | -1.29% | -9.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.12% | 1.91% | +1.21% |
Volatility
EFAD vs. IFLO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF (EFAD) is 3.73%, while VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) has a volatility of 4.77%. This indicates that EFAD 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
| EFAD | IFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.73% | 4.77% | -1.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.32% | 12.05% | -0.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.51% | 14.71% | -1.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.47% | 14.61% | -0.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.31% | 14.61% | +0.70% |
EFAD vs. IFLO - Expense Ratio Comparison
EFAD has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than IFLO's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
EFAD vs. IFLO - Dividend Comparison
EFAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, more than IFLO's 1.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFAD ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF | 2.65% | 2.83% | 2.64% | 2.29% | 1.76% | 2.98% | 1.49% | 2.05% | 2.37% | 2.42% | 2.88% | 1.94% |
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
EFAD and IFLO have a correlation of 0.82, 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 EFAD (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFAD dropped -35.74% vs IFLO's -6.44%.
On 1-year performance, IFLO leads with 31.49% vs 4.19% for EFAD. On fees, EFAD is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, EFAD has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. 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 4.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EFAD is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for IFLO.
EFAD has the higher dividend yield at 2.65%, compared with 1.57% for IFLO.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and VictoryShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EFAD and 0.56% for IFLO.
IFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 0.31), 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 EFAD 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