IFLO vs. OMAH

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

IFLO (VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF) and OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IFLO is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Victory International Free Cash Flow Index, while OMAH is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by VistaShares. IFLO is passively managed, while OMAH is actively managed. Over the past year, IFLO returned 37.24% vs 15.05% for OMAH. Their 0.37 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IFLO charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for OMAH.

Performance

IFLO vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFLO achieves a 24.86% return, which is significantly higher than OMAH's 9.07% return.

IFLO

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: 3.96%
• 6M: 17.41%
• YTD: 24.86%
• 1Y: 37.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 36.54%

OMAH

• 1D: -1.63%
• 1M: 0.08%
• 6M: 7.64%
• YTD: 9.07%
• 1Y: 15.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.18%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	$4.32M	$2.23M	$1.03M
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	$23.63M	$19.17M	$17.35M

IFLO vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	24.86%	13.12%
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	9.07%	5.75%

Correlation

The correlation between IFLO and OMAH is 0.35, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.37

IFLO vs. OMAH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IFLO	OMAH
Industrials	17.8%	5.9%
Technology	16.8%	10.5%
Energy	14.4%	7.7%
Basic Materials	13.8%	-
Healthcare	12.7%	5.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.8%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	12.7%
Communication Services	5.3%	19.1%
Financial Services	0.8%	39.1%
Utilities	0.8%	-
Real Estate	0.0%	-

Return for Risk

IFLO vs. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IFLO

IFLO Risk / Return Rank: 93
IFLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
IFLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
IFLO Omega Ratio Rank: 90
IFLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
IFLO Martin Ratio Rank: 94

OMAH

OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 74
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 63
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 81

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IFLO vs. OMAH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). 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.

	IFLO	OMAH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.60	1.77	+0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.64	2.47	+1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.31	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.81	5.13	+0.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.01	12.26	+7.74

IFLO vs. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFLO Sharpe Ratio is 2.60, which is higher than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFLO and OMAH, 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

IFLO vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFLO drawdown since its inception was -6.44%, smaller than the maximum OMAH drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFLO and OMAH.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFLO	OMAH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.44%	-11.83%	+5.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.44%	-2.95%	-3.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.63%	+1.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.28%	-1.23%	-0.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.87%	1.23%	+0.64%

Volatility

IFLO vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison

VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) has a higher volatility of 3.73% compared to VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) at 3.47%. This indicates that IFLO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMAH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IFLO	OMAH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.73%	3.47%	+0.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.22%	6.15%	+6.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.37%	8.52%	+5.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.53%	12.88%	+1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.53%	12.88%	+1.65%

IFLO vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFLO has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than OMAH's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFLO vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison

IFLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, less than OMAH's 15.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	1.49%	0.73%
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	15.08%	12.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFLO and OMAH in my portfolio?

IFLO and OMAH have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IFLO or OMAH?

IFLO has higher volatility (3.73%) compared to OMAH (3.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFLO dropped -6.44% vs OMAH's -11.83%.

Which ETF is better, IFLO or OMAH?

On 1-year performance, IFLO leads with 37.24% vs 15.05% for OMAH. On fees, IFLO is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, OMAH has been the lower-risk option at 3.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IFLO or OMAH?

Over the 1-year period, IFLO has performed better with a 37.24% return vs 15.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFLO or OMAH?

IFLO is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for OMAH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IFLO or OMAH?

OMAH has the higher dividend yield at 15.08%, compared with 1.49% for IFLO.

What is the main difference between IFLO and OMAH?

IFLO is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while OMAH is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for IFLO and 0.95% for OMAH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 1.77), 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.