IFV vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IFV (First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - IFV tracks the Dorsey Wright International Focus Five Index while CIL tracks the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IFV returned 7.10%/yr vs 8.21%/yr for CIL. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IFV charges 1.06%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

IFV vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF (IFV) 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, IFV achieves a 12.94% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, IFV has underperformed CIL with an annualized return of 7.10%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively higher 8.21% annualized return.

IFV

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 3.11%
• YTD: 12.94%
• 6M: 16.30%
• 1Y: 29.74%
• 3Y*: 19.18%
• 5Y*: 4.76%
• 10Y*: 7.10%

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)

IFV vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IFV First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF	12.94%	32.26%	0.33%	20.45%	-25.39%	5.59%	6.15%	26.29%	-20.44%	32.58%
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 IFV and CIL is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.67
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015	0.60

The correlation between IFV and CIL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

IFV vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IFV	CIL
Industrials	31.1%	18.4%
Financial Services	11.6%	24.8%
Basic Materials	10.3%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	8.2%
Energy	8.5%	4.6%
Technology	7.5%	6.4%
Real Estate	6.1%	2.2%
Utilities	5.4%	6.6%
Healthcare	4.0%	7.7%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	8.8%
Communication Services	2.6%	5.8%

Return for Risk

IFV vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

IFV

IFV Risk / Return Rank: 53
IFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
IFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
IFV Omega Ratio Rank: 55
IFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IFV Martin Ratio Rank: 53

CIL

CIL Risk / Return Rank: 76
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

IFV vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF (IFV) 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.

	IFV	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	2.24	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	3.22	-0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.49	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	3.95	-1.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.97	16.75	-7.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IFV vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFV 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IFV	CIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.84	2.24	-0.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27	0.46	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.34	0.48	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.24	0.43	-0.20

Drawdowns

IFV vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFV drawdown since its inception was -48.89%, which is greater than CIL's maximum drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFV and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFV	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.89%	-36.27%	-12.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.57%	-4.60%	-7.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.66%	-11.96%	-2.70%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.32%	-29.89%	-5.43%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.89%	-36.27%	-12.62%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.32%	-0.58%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.23%	-6.56%	-6.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.32%	1.07%	+2.25%

Volatility

IFV vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF (IFV) has a higher volatility of 6.06% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that IFV'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.

Volatility by Period

	IFV	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.06%	0.00%	+6.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.47%	4.23%	+9.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.24%	8.19%	+8.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.97%	16.49%	+1.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.75%	17.17%	+3.58%

IFV vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFV has a 1.06% expense ratio, which is higher than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFV vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

IFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.76%, more than CIL's 1.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
IFV First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF	1.76%	1.95%	2.31%	2.88%	3.79%	1.04%	1.53%	2.91%	1.86%	1.43%	1.10%	1.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFV and CIL in my portfolio?

IFV and CIL have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IFV or CIL?

IFV has higher volatility (6.06%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFV dropped -48.89% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, IFV or CIL?

On 10-year performance, CIL leads with 8.21% vs 7.10% for IFV. On fees, CIL is cheaper at 0.45% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, IFV or CIL?

Over the 10-year period, CIL has performed better with a 8.21% return vs 7.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFV or CIL?

CIL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.06% for IFV.

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

IFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.76%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

What is the main difference between IFV and CIL?

IFV tracks Dorsey Wright International Focus Five Index, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 1.06% for IFV and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.84), 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.