IFLO vs. VEA

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

IFLO (VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF) and VEA (Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. Over the past year, IFLO returned 31.49% vs 26.21% for VEA. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IFLO charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VEA.

Performance

IFLO vs. VEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) and Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFLO achieves a 18.32% return, which is significantly higher than VEA's 12.45% return.

IFLO

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: -0.87%
• 6M: 14.97%
• YTD: 18.32%
• 1Y: 31.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VEA

• 1D: -1.73%
• 1M: -1.99%
• 6M: 8.21%
• YTD: 12.45%
• 1Y: 26.21%
• 3Y*: 17.52%
• 5Y*: 9.44%
• 10Y*: 10.00%

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

IFLO vs. VEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	18.32%	13.12%
VEA Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF	12.45%	14.25%

Correlation

The correlation between IFLO and VEA is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.88

The correlation between IFLO and VEA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

IFLO vs. VEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IFLO	VEA
Technology	21.5%	17.2%
Industrials	18.1%	17.8%
Consumer Cyclical	13.8%	7.1%
Energy	12.1%	4.9%
Healthcare	11.7%	7.9%
Basic Materials	11.3%	7.7%
Communication Services	6.7%	3.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	5.4%
Financial Services	1.1%	23.1%
Utilities	1.0%	3.2%
Real Estate	0.0%	2.3%

Return for Risk

IFLO vs. VEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IFLO

IFLO Risk / Return Rank: 87
IFLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
IFLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
IFLO Omega Ratio Rank: 82
IFLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
IFLO Martin Ratio Rank: 91

VEA

VEA Risk / Return Rank: 58
VEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
VEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
VEA Omega Ratio Rank: 58
VEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
VEA Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

IFLO vs. VEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) and Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA). 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	VEA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	1.55	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.13	2.15	+0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.28	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.91	2.26	+2.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.50	8.59	+7.91

IFLO vs. VEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFLO Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the VEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFLO and VEA, 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. VEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFLO drawdown since its inception was -6.44%, smaller than the maximum VEA drawdown of -60.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFLO and VEA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFLO	VEA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.44%	-60.68%	+54.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.44%	-11.63%	+5.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.45%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.71%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.22%	-3.63%	+1.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.29%	-13.23%	+11.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.91%	3.06%	-1.15%

Volatility

IFLO vs. VEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) is 4.77%, while Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) has a volatility of 6.33%. This indicates that IFLO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IFLO	VEA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.77%	6.33%	-1.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.05%	15.07%	-3.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.71%	17.02%	-2.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.61%	16.79%	-2.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.61%	17.17%	-2.56%

IFLO vs. VEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFLO has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is higher than VEA's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFLO vs. VEA - Dividend Comparison

IFLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, less than VEA's 2.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
VEA Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF	2.60%	3.22%	3.35%	3.15%	2.91%	3.16%	2.04%	3.04%	3.35%	2.77%	3.05%	2.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFLO and VEA in my portfolio?

IFLO and VEA have a correlation of 0.88, 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 VEA?

VEA has higher volatility (6.33%) compared to IFLO (4.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFLO dropped -6.44% vs VEA's -60.68%.

Which ETF is better, IFLO or VEA?

On 1-year performance, IFLO leads with 31.49% vs 26.21% for VEA. On fees, VEA is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, IFLO has been the lower-risk option at 4.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IFLO or VEA?

Over the 1-year period, IFLO has performed better with a 31.49% return vs 26.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFLO or VEA?

VEA is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for IFLO.

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

VEA has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 1.57% for IFLO.

What is the main difference between IFLO and VEA?

They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for IFLO and 0.03% for VEA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.55), 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.