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

Performance

FEDM vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares ESG & Climate Developed Markets ex-US Core Index Fund (FEDM) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEDM achieves a 6.03% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return.


FEDM

1D
-0.91%
1M
3.29%
YTD
6.03%
6M
8.22%
1Y
16.39%
3Y*
13.99%
5Y*
10Y*

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

FEDM vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FEDM
FlexShares ESG & Climate Developed Markets ex-US Core Index Fund
6.03%26.85%2.85%17.39%-15.25%1.87%
CIL
VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF
5.44%32.99%3.76%16.29%-16.00%0.55%

Correlation

The correlation between FEDM and CIL is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2021

0.79

Over the past year, the correlation between FEDM and CIL has dropped to 0.58 - well below their long-term average of 0.79, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FEDM vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FEDM
CIL

Financial Services

27.1%
24.8%

Industrials

17.8%
18.4%

Technology

10.9%
6.4%

Healthcare

10.0%
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

7.1%
8.8%

Basic Materials

5.9%
6.6%

Energy

5.7%
4.6%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
8.2%

Communication Services

4.6%
5.8%

Utilities

3.5%
6.6%

Real Estate

1.8%
2.2%

Financial Services

FEDM
27.1%
CIL
24.8%

Industrials

FEDM
17.8%
CIL
18.4%

Technology

FEDM
10.9%
CIL
6.4%

Healthcare

FEDM
10.0%
CIL
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

FEDM
7.1%
CIL
8.8%

Basic Materials

FEDM
5.9%
CIL
6.6%

Energy

FEDM
5.7%
CIL
4.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FEDM
5.7%
CIL
8.2%

Communication Services

FEDM
4.6%
CIL
5.8%

Utilities

FEDM
3.5%
CIL
6.6%

Real Estate

FEDM
1.8%
CIL
2.2%

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

FEDM vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEDM
FEDM Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
FEDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEDM Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
FEDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEDM Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

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
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.

FEDM vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares ESG & Climate Developed Markets ex-US Core Index Fund (FEDM) 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.


FEDMCILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.49

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.38

3.95

-2.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.97

16.75

-11.78

FEDM vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEDM Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEDM 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FEDMCILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.02

2.24

-1.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.43

+0.02

Drawdowns

FEDM vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEDM drawdown since its inception was -29.37%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEDM and CIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEDMCILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.37%

-36.27%

+6.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.92%

-4.60%

-7.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.24%

-11.96%

-2.28%

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

-2.01%

-0.58%

-1.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.99%

-6.56%

-0.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.30%

1.07%

+2.23%

Volatility

FEDM vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

FlexShares ESG & Climate Developed Markets ex-US Core Index Fund (FEDM) has a higher volatility of 4.78% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that FEDM'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEDMCILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.78%

0.00%

+4.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.44%

4.23%

+8.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.14%

8.19%

+7.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.46%

16.49%

-0.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.46%

17.17%

-0.71%

FEDM vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEDM has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEDM vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

FEDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%, more than CIL's 1.67% 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%
FEDM
FlexShares ESG & Climate Developed Markets ex-US Core Index Fund
2.82%2.97%2.94%2.61%2.53%0.62%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FEDM and CIL have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FEDM has higher volatility (4.78%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEDM dropped -29.37% vs CIL's -36.27%.

On 3-year performance, CIL leads with 15.59% vs 13.99% for FEDM. On fees, FEDM is cheaper at 0.12% 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 3-year period, CIL has performed better with a 15.59% return vs 13.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEDM is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

FEDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

FEDM tracks Northern Trust ESG & Climate Developed Markets ex-US Core Index - Benchmark TR Net, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: FlexShares and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for FEDM and 0.45% for CIL.

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.02), 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 FEDM and CIL

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