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

Performance

HEFA vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Currency Hedged MSCI EAFE ETF (HEFA) 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, HEFA achieves a 10.24% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, HEFA has outperformed CIL with an annualized return of 12.60%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively lower 8.21% annualized return.


HEFA

1D
-0.45%
1M
4.65%
YTD
10.24%
6M
12.49%
1Y
25.95%
3Y*
18.32%
5Y*
13.52%
10Y*
12.60%

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)

HEFA vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HEFA
iShares Currency Hedged MSCI EAFE ETF
10.24%24.58%13.71%20.33%-4.86%19.59%2.09%27.63%-9.33%16.67%
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%

Correlation

The correlation between HEFA and CIL is 0.55, 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

0.55

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

0.71

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015

0.63

The correlation between HEFA and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.71 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HEFA vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HEFA
CIL

Financial Services

24.3%
24.8%

Industrials

19.3%
18.4%

Technology

11.0%
6.4%

Healthcare

10.1%
7.7%

Consumer Cyclical

7.4%
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
8.8%

Basic Materials

6.2%
6.6%

Communication Services

4.4%
5.8%

Energy

3.8%
4.6%

Utilities

3.7%
6.6%

Real Estate

1.8%
2.2%

Financial Services

HEFA
24.3%
CIL
24.8%

Industrials

HEFA
19.3%
CIL
18.4%

Technology

HEFA
11.0%
CIL
6.4%

Healthcare

HEFA
10.1%
CIL
7.7%

Consumer Cyclical

HEFA
7.4%
CIL
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

HEFA
6.8%
CIL
8.8%

Basic Materials

HEFA
6.2%
CIL
6.6%

Communication Services

HEFA
4.4%
CIL
5.8%

Energy

HEFA
3.8%
CIL
4.6%

Utilities

HEFA
3.7%
CIL
6.6%

Real Estate

HEFA
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

HEFA vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

HEFA
HEFA Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
HEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
HEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
HEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
HEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

HEFA vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Currency Hedged MSCI EAFE ETF (HEFA) 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.


HEFACILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.49

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.74

3.95

-1.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.43

16.75

-5.32

HEFA vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HEFA Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is comparable to the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HEFA 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


HEFACILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.07

2.24

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.99

0.46

+0.53

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

0.48

+0.32

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.66

0.43

+0.23

Drawdowns

HEFA vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HEFA drawdown since its inception was -32.39%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HEFA and CIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HEFACILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.39%

-36.27%

+3.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.52%

-4.60%

-4.92%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.28%

-11.96%

-2.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.79%

-29.89%

+15.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.39%

-36.27%

+3.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.45%

-0.58%

+0.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.17%

-6.56%

+2.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.28%

1.07%

+1.21%

Volatility

HEFA vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

iShares Currency Hedged MSCI EAFE ETF (HEFA) has a higher volatility of 4.05% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that HEFA'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


HEFACILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.05%

0.00%

+4.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.13%

4.23%

+5.90%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.59%

8.19%

+4.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.76%

16.49%

-2.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.86%

17.17%

-1.31%

HEFA vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

HEFA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

HEFA vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

HEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.99%, 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%
HEFA
iShares Currency Hedged MSCI EAFE ETF
3.99%4.40%3.09%3.02%25.14%3.06%2.10%7.56%4.58%2.55%3.17%3.54%

Frequently Asked Questions


HEFA and CIL have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HEFA has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HEFA dropped -32.39% vs CIL's -36.27%.

On 10-year performance, HEFA leads with 12.60% vs 8.21% for CIL. On fees, HEFA is cheaper at 0.35% 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 10-year period, HEFA has performed better with a 12.60% return vs 8.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

HEFA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

HEFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.99%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

HEFA tracks MSCI EAFE 100% Hedged to USD Index, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for HEFA and 0.45% for CIL.

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 2.07), 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 HEFA 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