IMTM vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IMTM (iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMTM is a Momentum fund tracking the MSCI World ex USA Momentum, while CIL is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IMTM returned 10.29%/yr vs 8.21%/yr for CIL. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMTM charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

IMTM vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) 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, IMTM achieves a 11.05% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, IMTM has outperformed CIL with an annualized return of 10.29%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively lower 8.21% annualized return.

IMTM

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 4.43%
• YTD: 11.05%
• 6M: 14.04%
• 1Y: 23.92%
• 3Y*: 21.55%
• 5Y*: 9.00%
• 10Y*: 10.29%

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)

IMTM vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IMTM iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF	11.05%	34.50%	12.17%	13.89%	-16.81%	3.50%	22.17%	24.52%	-14.31%	25.46%
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 IMTM and CIL is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015	0.67

The correlation between IMTM and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.81 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IMTM vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMTM	CIL
Financial Services	29.6%	24.8%
Industrials	17.5%	18.4%
Technology	11.4%	6.4%
Energy	9.4%	4.6%
Basic Materials	9.3%	6.6%
Healthcare	9.0%	7.7%
Utilities	6.4%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	8.8%
Communication Services	1.9%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	1.8%	8.2%
Real Estate	1.2%	2.2%

Return for Risk

IMTM vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMTM

IMTM Risk / Return Rank: 40
IMTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
IMTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
IMTM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
IMTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
IMTM Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

IMTM vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) 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.

	IMTM	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	2.24	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	3.22	-1.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.49	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.87	3.95	-2.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.46	16.75	-9.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IMTM vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMTM Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMTM 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

	IMTM	CIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	2.24	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	0.46	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.48	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.43	+0.07

Drawdowns

IMTM vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMTM drawdown since its inception was -32.66%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMTM and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMTM	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.66%	-36.27%	+3.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.85%	-4.60%	-8.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.85%	-11.96%	-0.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.66%	-29.89%	-2.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.66%	-36.27%	+3.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.58%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.45%	-6.56%	-0.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.21%	1.07%	+2.14%

Volatility

IMTM vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) has a higher volatility of 5.48% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that IMTM'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

	IMTM	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.48%	0.00%	+5.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.98%	4.23%	+10.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.04%	8.19%	+8.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.64%	16.49%	+1.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.64%	17.17%	+0.47%

IMTM vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMTM has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMTM vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

IMTM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.23%, 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%
IMTM iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF	4.23%	4.70%	2.93%	2.29%	2.68%	2.51%	0.97%	2.13%	2.36%	1.92%	2.75%	1.56%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMTM and CIL in my portfolio?

IMTM and CIL have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IMTM or CIL?

IMTM has higher volatility (5.48%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMTM dropped -32.66% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, IMTM or CIL?

On 10-year performance, IMTM leads with 10.29% vs 8.21% for CIL. On fees, IMTM is cheaper at 0.30% 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, IMTM or CIL?

Over the 10-year period, IMTM has performed better with a 10.29% return vs 8.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMTM or CIL?

IMTM is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

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

IMTM has the higher dividend yield at 4.23%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

What is the main difference between IMTM and CIL?

IMTM is categorized as Momentum, while CIL is Foreign Large Cap Equities. IMTM tracks MSCI World ex USA Momentum, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for IMTM and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.41), 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.