FRGN vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FRGN (Horizon International Equity ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. FRGN is actively managed, while CIL is passively managed. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FRGN charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

FRGN vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Horizon International Equity ETF (FRGN) 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, FRGN achieves a 21.19% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return.

FRGN

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: 21.19%
• 6M: 20.90%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

FRGN vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FRGN Horizon International Equity ETF	21.19%	1.47%
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	5.44%	2.68%

Correlation

The correlation between FRGN and CIL is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2025	0.31

FRGN vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FRGN	CIL
Technology	23.2%	6.4%
Basic Materials	10.3%	6.6%
Energy	8.7%	4.6%
Communication Services	4.9%	5.8%
Real Estate	1.4%	2.2%
Utilities	1.2%	6.6%
Financial Services	1.1%	24.8%
Consumer Cyclical	0.4%	8.2%
Healthcare	0.3%	7.7%
Industrials	0.3%	18.4%
Consumer Defensive	0.2%	8.8%

Return for Risk

FRGN vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FRGN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

FRGN vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizon International Equity ETF (FRGN) 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.

	FRGN	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.21	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.25	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.51	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.66	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	15.90	—

Drawdowns

FRGN vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FRGN drawdown since its inception was -12.40%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FRGN and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FRGN	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.40%	-36.27%	+23.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.60%	—
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.84%	-0.58%	-3.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.37%	-6.52%	+4.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.07%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FRGN	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.00%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	3.36%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.35%	7.63%	+14.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.35%	16.47%	+5.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.35%	17.07%	+5.28%

FRGN vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FRGN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

FRGN vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

FRGN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, less 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%
FRGN Horizon International Equity ETF	0.21%	0.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FRGN and CIL in my portfolio?

FRGN and CIL have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FRGN or CIL?

On fees, CIL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FRGN or CIL?

CIL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FRGN.

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

CIL has the higher dividend yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.21% for FRGN.

What is the main difference between FRGN and CIL?

They also come from different issuers: Horizon and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for FRGN and 0.45% for CIL.