PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IPOS vs. CIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IPOS vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) and VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPOS achieves a 40.15% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, IPOS has underperformed CIL with an annualized return of 3.00%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively higher 8.21% annualized return.


IPOS

1D
0.43%
1M
10.58%
YTD
40.15%
6M
44.26%
1Y
65.50%
3Y*
15.28%
5Y*
-7.69%
10Y*
3.00%

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)

IPOS vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IPOS
Renaissance International IPO ETF
40.15%39.93%-12.34%-16.49%-33.46%-30.62%50.71%30.93%-22.33%36.83%
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 IPOS and CIL is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.56

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015

0.45

The correlation between IPOS and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (1 year) to 0.56 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IPOS vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IPOS
CIL

Technology

42.0%
6.4%

Healthcare

16.2%
7.7%

Industrials

15.0%
18.4%

Financial Services

9.6%
24.8%

Consumer Cyclical

7.1%
8.2%

Basic Materials

5.3%
6.6%

Energy

4.9%
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
8.8%

Utilities

3.1%
6.6%

Communication Services

0.3%
5.8%

Real Estate

-

2.2%

Technology

IPOS
42.0%
CIL
6.4%

Healthcare

IPOS
16.2%
CIL
7.7%

Industrials

IPOS
15.0%
CIL
18.4%

Financial Services

IPOS
9.6%
CIL
24.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IPOS
7.1%
CIL
8.2%

Basic Materials

IPOS
5.3%
CIL
6.6%

Energy

IPOS
4.9%
CIL
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

IPOS
4.7%
CIL
8.8%

Utilities

IPOS
3.1%
CIL
6.6%

Communication Services

IPOS
0.3%
CIL
5.8%

Real Estate

IPOS

-

CIL
2.2%

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

IPOS vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPOS
IPOS Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
IPOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IPOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
IPOS Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
IPOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
IPOS Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

CIL
CIL Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IPOS vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) 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.


IPOSCILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.49

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.83

3.95

-0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.58

16.75

-5.17

IPOS vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IPOSCILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.24

2.24

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.28

0.46

-0.74

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.12

0.48

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.09

0.43

-0.34

Drawdowns

IPOS vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPOS drawdown since its inception was -73.09%, which is greater than CIL's maximum drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPOS and CIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IPOSCILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-73.09%

-36.27%

-36.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.17%

-4.60%

-12.57%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.08%

-11.96%

-22.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-69.93%

-29.89%

-40.04%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-73.09%

-36.27%

-36.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-40.44%

-0.58%

-39.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-31.99%

-6.56%

-25.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.67%

1.07%

+4.60%

Volatility

IPOS vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

Renaissance International IPO ETF (IPOS) has a higher volatility of 12.05% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that IPOS'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IPOSCILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.05%

0.00%

+12.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.45%

4.23%

+22.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.41%

8.19%

+21.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.19%

16.49%

+10.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.13%

17.17%

+6.96%

IPOS vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPOS has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

IPOS vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

IPOS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.68%, less than CIL's 1.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
IPOS
Renaissance International IPO ETF
0.68%1.04%0.93%0.33%0.00%0.00%0.25%0.89%1.12%0.87%1.73%1.08%

Frequently Asked Questions


IPOS and CIL 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.

IPOS has higher volatility (12.05%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPOS dropped -73.09% vs CIL's -36.27%.

On 10-year performance, CIL leads with 8.21% vs 3.00% for IPOS. 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.

Over the 10-year period, CIL has performed better with a 8.21% return vs 3.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CIL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for IPOS.

CIL has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 0.68% for IPOS.

IPOS tracks Renaissance International IPO Index, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: Renaissance Capital and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for IPOS and 0.45% for CIL.

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

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IPOS and CIL

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