OAIM vs. IFLO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

OAIM (OneAscent International Equity ETF) and IFLO (VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. OAIM is actively managed, while IFLO is passively managed. Over the past year, OAIM returned 23.68% vs 36.91% for IFLO. Their 0.70 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. OAIM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for IFLO.

Performance

OAIM vs. IFLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in OneAscent International Equity ETF (OAIM) and VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OAIM achieves a 12.08% return, which is significantly lower than IFLO's 22.59% return.

OAIM

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: -0.57%
• 6M: 6.57%
• YTD: 12.08%
• 1Y: 23.68%
• 3Y*: 15.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.36%

IFLO

• 1D: -1.73%
• 1M: 3.06%
• 6M: 17.38%
• YTD: 22.59%
• 1Y: 36.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 34.80%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	$595.85K	$548.57K	$406.06K
OAIM OneAscent International Equity ETF	$1.28M	$1.10M	$1.12M

OAIM vs. IFLO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
OAIM OneAscent International Equity ETF	12.08%	11.64%
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	22.59%	13.12%

Correlation

The correlation between OAIM and IFLO is 0.70, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.70

The correlation between OAIM and IFLO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

OAIM vs. IFLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OAIM	IFLO
Financial Services	24.8%	0.8%
Technology	19.5%	16.8%
Industrials	16.4%	17.8%
Energy	8.3%	14.4%
Basic Materials	7.7%	13.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	10.8%
Real Estate	4.6%	0.0%
Communication Services	4.3%	5.3%
Utilities	3.3%	0.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	6.7%
Healthcare	1.1%	12.7%

Return for Risk

OAIM vs. IFLO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

OAIM

OAIM Risk / Return Rank: 55
OAIM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
OAIM Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
OAIM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
OAIM Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
OAIM Martin Ratio Rank: 58

IFLO

IFLO Risk / Return Rank: 94
IFLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
IFLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
IFLO Omega Ratio Rank: 92
IFLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
IFLO Martin Ratio Rank: 95

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

OAIM vs. IFLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for OneAscent International Equity ETF (OAIM) and VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	OAIM	IFLO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	2.57	-1.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	3.60	-1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.45	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	5.73	-3.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.97	19.78	-12.81

OAIM vs. IFLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OAIM Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the IFLO Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OAIM and IFLO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

OAIM vs. IFLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OAIM drawdown since its inception was -14.69%, which is greater than IFLO's maximum drawdown of -6.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OAIM and IFLO.

Drawdown Indicators

	OAIM	IFLO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.69%	-6.44%	-8.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.88%	-6.44%	-4.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.85%	-1.73%	-3.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.84%	-1.29%	-1.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.31%	1.86%	+1.45%

Volatility

OAIM vs. IFLO - Volatility Comparison

OneAscent International Equity ETF (OAIM) has a higher volatility of 7.38% compared to VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF (IFLO) at 4.10%. This indicates that OAIM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IFLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OAIM	IFLO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.38%	4.10%	+3.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.44%	12.32%	+4.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.22%	14.41%	+3.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.36%	14.59%	+2.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.36%	14.59%	+2.77%

OAIM vs. IFLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

OAIM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IFLO's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

OAIM vs. IFLO - Dividend Comparison

OAIM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than IFLO's 1.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
IFLO VictoryShares International Free Cash Flow ETF	1.52%	0.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
OAIM OneAscent International Equity ETF	0.88%	0.98%	2.40%	1.94%	0.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OAIM and IFLO in my portfolio?

OAIM and IFLO have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OAIM or IFLO?

OAIM has higher volatility (7.38%) compared to IFLO (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OAIM dropped -14.69% vs IFLO's -6.44%.

Which ETF is better, OAIM or IFLO?

On 1-year performance, IFLO leads with 36.91% vs 23.68% for OAIM. On fees, IFLO is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, IFLO has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OAIM or IFLO?

Over the 1-year period, IFLO has performed better with a 36.91% return vs 23.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OAIM or IFLO?

IFLO is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for OAIM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OAIM or IFLO?

IFLO has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.88% for OAIM.

What is the main difference between OAIM and IFLO?

They also come from different issuers: Oneascent and VictoryShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for OAIM and 0.56% for IFLO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 1.27), 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.