IMFL vs. VT
IMFL (Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and VT (Vanguard Total World Stock ETF) are both Global Equities funds - IMFL tracks the FTSE Developed ex US Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index while VT tracks the FTSE Global All Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMFL returned 8.50%/yr vs 10.99%/yr for VT. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IMFL charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for VT.
Performance
IMFL vs. VT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMFL achieves a 17.58% return, which is significantly higher than VT's 12.24% return.
IMFL
- 1D
- -0.54%
- 1M
- 5.50%
- YTD
- 17.58%
- 6M
- 20.95%
- 1Y
- 33.05%
- 3Y*
- 17.51%
- 5Y*
- 8.50%
- 10Y*
- —
VT
- 1D
- -0.88%
- 1M
- 4.91%
- YTD
- 12.24%
- 6M
- 13.14%
- 1Y
- 29.24%
- 3Y*
- 20.93%
- 5Y*
- 10.99%
- 10Y*
- 12.74%
IMFL vs. VT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMFL Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 17.58% | 30.89% | -3.57% | 25.51% | -17.32% | 6.94% |
VT Vanguard Total World Stock ETF | 12.24% | 22.43% | 16.49% | 22.02% | -18.00% | 11.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMFL and VT is 0.83, 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 | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2021 | 0.82 |
The correlation between IMFL and VT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
IMFL vs. VT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IMFL
VT
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Industrials
IMFL
VT
Technology
IMFL
VT
Healthcare
IMFL
VT
Consumer Defensive
IMFL
VT
Financial Services
IMFL
VT
Consumer Cyclical
IMFL
VT
Energy
IMFL
VT
Basic Materials
IMFL
VT
Utilities
IMFL
VT
Communication Services
IMFL
VT
Real Estate
IMFL
VT
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
IMFL vs. VT — Risk / Return Rank
IMFL
VT
IMFL vs. VT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF (IMFL) and Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT). 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.
| IMFL | VT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.42 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.82 | 3.04 | -0.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.97 | 13.53 | -3.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IMFL | VT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | 2.31 | -0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 | 0.69 | -0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.74 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.62 | 0.44 | +0.19 |
Drawdowns
IMFL vs. VT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMFL drawdown since its inception was -33.26%, smaller than the maximum VT drawdown of -50.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMFL and VT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMFL | VT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.26% | -50.27% | +17.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.77% | -9.67% | -2.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.52% | -16.51% | +2.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.26% | -26.38% | -6.88% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.24% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.54% | -0.88% | +0.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.24% | -7.02% | -0.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.32% | 2.17% | +1.15% |
Volatility
IMFL vs. VT - Volatility Comparison
Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF (IMFL) has a higher volatility of 5.74% compared to Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) at 3.83%. This indicates that IMFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMFL | VT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.74% | 3.83% | +1.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.08% | 10.17% | +2.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.71% | 12.70% | +3.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.05% | 16.05% | 0.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.99% | 17.23% | -1.24% |
IMFL vs. VT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMFL has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than VT's 0.06% expense ratio.
Dividends
IMFL vs. VT - Dividend Comparison
IMFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%, more than VT's 1.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMFL Invesco International Developed Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 2.87% | 2.88% | 3.56% | 3.85% | 3.35% | 3.94% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VT Vanguard Total World Stock ETF | 1.59% | 1.82% | 1.95% | 2.08% | 2.20% | 1.82% | 1.66% | 2.32% | 2.53% | 2.11% | 2.39% | 2.45% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMFL and VT have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IMFL has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to VT (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMFL dropped -33.26% vs VT's -50.27%.
On 5-year performance, VT leads with 10.99% vs 8.50% for IMFL. On fees, VT is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, VT has been the lower-risk option at 3.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, VT has performed better with a 10.99% return vs 8.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VT is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for IMFL.
IMFL has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 1.59% for VT.
IMFL tracks FTSE Developed ex US Invesco Dynamic Multifactor Index, while VT tracks FTSE Global All Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for IMFL and 0.06% for VT.
VT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 2.12), 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.
Find the right allocation for IMFL and VT
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