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

Performance

NUDM vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF (NUDM) 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, NUDM achieves a 7.90% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return.


NUDM

1D
-0.62%
1M
4.14%
YTD
7.90%
6M
9.70%
1Y
21.49%
3Y*
16.01%
5Y*
7.98%
10Y*

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)

NUDM vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NUDM
Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF
7.90%29.60%5.47%17.70%-15.16%10.62%10.06%24.58%-14.82%8.40%
CIL
VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF
5.44%32.99%3.76%16.29%-16.00%11.07%7.21%19.13%-13.34%9.59%

Correlation

The correlation between NUDM and CIL is 0.68, 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

0.68

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

0.84

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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2017

0.74

The correlation between NUDM and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (1 year) to 0.84 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NUDM vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NUDM
CIL

Financial Services

25.9%
24.8%

Industrials

21.2%
18.4%

Technology

12.1%
6.4%

Healthcare

10.8%
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

6.0%
8.2%

Basic Materials

5.4%
6.6%

Communication Services

4.5%
5.8%

Utilities

3.8%
6.6%

Real Estate

2.3%
2.2%

Energy

0.7%
4.6%

Financial Services

NUDM
25.9%
CIL
24.8%

Industrials

NUDM
21.2%
CIL
18.4%

Technology

NUDM
12.1%
CIL
6.4%

Healthcare

NUDM
10.8%
CIL
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

NUDM
7.4%
CIL
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

NUDM
6.0%
CIL
8.2%

Basic Materials

NUDM
5.4%
CIL
6.6%

Communication Services

NUDM
4.5%
CIL
5.8%

Utilities

NUDM
3.8%
CIL
6.6%

Real Estate

NUDM
2.3%
CIL
2.2%

Energy

NUDM
0.7%
CIL
4.6%

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

NUDM vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUDM
NUDM Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
NUDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NUDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
NUDM Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
NUDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
NUDM Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

NUDM vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF (NUDM) 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.


NUDMCILDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.37

2.24

-0.86

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.96

3.22

-1.25

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.49

-0.24

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.73

3.95

-2.22

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

6.46

16.75

-10.30

NUDM vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUDM Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is lower than the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUDM 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


NUDMCILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.37

2.24

-0.86

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.46

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.48

0.43

+0.04

Drawdowns

NUDM vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUDM drawdown since its inception was -32.01%, smaller than the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUDM and CIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NUDMCILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.01%

-36.27%

+4.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.50%

-4.60%

-7.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.47%

-11.96%

-1.51%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.09%

-29.89%

-0.20%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.71%

-0.58%

-1.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.86%

-6.56%

-0.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.34%

1.07%

+2.27%

Volatility

NUDM vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF (NUDM) has a higher volatility of 5.22% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that NUDM'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


NUDMCILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.22%

0.00%

+5.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.03%

4.23%

+8.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.74%

8.19%

+7.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.64%

16.49%

+0.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.59%

17.17%

+0.42%

NUDM vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

NUDM vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

NUDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.92%, more 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%
NUDM
Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF
6.92%7.46%3.33%3.14%1.98%4.31%1.47%3.42%2.45%0.47%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NUDM and CIL have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

NUDM has higher volatility (5.22%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUDM dropped -32.01% vs CIL's -36.27%.

On 5-year performance, NUDM leads with 7.98% vs 7.45% for CIL. On fees, NUDM 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.

Over the 5-year period, NUDM has performed better with a 7.98% return vs 7.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

NUDM has the higher dividend yield at 6.92%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

NUDM tracks MSCI TIAA ESG International DM, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for NUDM and 0.45% for CIL.

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.37), 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 NUDM 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