RFDI vs. CIL

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

RFDI (First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. RFDI is actively managed, while CIL is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RFDI returned 9.20%/yr vs 8.18%/yr for CIL. Their 0.72 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RFDI charges 0.83%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

RFDI vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF (RFDI) 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, RFDI achieves a 15.55% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, RFDI has outperformed CIL with an annualized return of 9.20%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively lower 8.18% annualized return.

RFDI

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: 4.44%
• 6M: 7.59%
• YTD: 15.55%
• 1Y: 30.05%
• 3Y*: 21.02%
• 5Y*: 8.42%
• 10Y*: 9.20%
• ALL TIME*: 9.09%

CIL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• 6M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.44%
• 1Y: 14.95%
• 3Y*: 15.35%
• 5Y*: 7.07%
• 10Y*: 8.18%
• ALL TIME*: 7.32%

*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)
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
RFDI First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF	$635.73K	$510.90K	$415.25K

RFDI vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RFDI First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF	15.55%	35.95%	5.56%	18.14%	-23.57%	17.36%	9.16%	20.47%	-18.26%	24.08%
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 RFDI and CIL is 0.55, 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.	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.77
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 14, 2016	0.72

The correlation between RFDI and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.82 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RFDI vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFDI	CIL
Financial Services	28.7%	24.8%
Industrials	11.5%	18.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	8.2%
Energy	9.4%	4.6%
Technology	9.1%	6.4%
Healthcare	8.6%	7.7%
Consumer Defensive	7.1%	8.8%
Communication Services	4.9%	5.8%
Basic Materials	4.4%	6.6%
Utilities	4.2%	6.6%
Real Estate	1.8%	2.2%

Return for Risk

RFDI vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFDI

RFDI Risk / Return Rank: 77
RFDI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
RFDI Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
RFDI Omega Ratio Rank: 78
RFDI Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
RFDI Martin Ratio Rank: 76

CIL

CIL Risk / Return Rank: 90
CIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
CIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
CIL Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CIL Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

RFDI vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF (RFDI) 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.

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.

	RFDI	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.34	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	3.53	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.62	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.96	3.40	-0.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.83	16.94	-6.11

RFDI vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFDI Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFDI 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.

Drawdowns

RFDI vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFDI drawdown since its inception was -39.40%, which is greater than CIL's maximum drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFDI and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFDI	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.40%	-36.27%	-3.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.20%	-4.60%	-5.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.44%	-11.29%	-2.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.87%	-29.89%	-5.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.40%	-36.27%	-3.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.58%	+0.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.10%	-6.46%	-2.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.78%	1.04%	+1.74%

Volatility

RFDI vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF (RFDI) has a higher volatility of 3.92% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that RFDI'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

	RFDI	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.92%	0.00%	+3.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.63%	2.10%	+10.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.85%	6.75%	+8.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.84%	16.39%	+0.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.03%	16.74%	+0.29%

RFDI vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFDI has a 0.83% expense ratio, which is higher than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFDI vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

RFDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, more than CIL's 1.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CIL VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF	1.05%	2.70%	3.46%	2.91%	2.41%	3.04%	1.73%	2.69%	2.85%	2.17%	2.34%	0.43%
RFDI First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF	3.06%	3.45%	5.21%	2.43%	5.00%	3.22%	1.34%	2.72%	2.59%	1.63%	1.85%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFDI and CIL in my portfolio?

RFDI and CIL have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFDI or CIL?

RFDI has higher volatility (3.92%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFDI dropped -39.40% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, RFDI or CIL?

On 10-year performance, RFDI leads with 9.20% vs 8.18% for CIL. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, RFDI or CIL?

Over the 10-year period, RFDI has performed better with a 9.20% return vs 8.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFDI or CIL?

CIL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.83% for RFDI.

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

RFDI has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 1.05% for CIL.

What is the main difference between RFDI and CIL?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.83% for RFDI and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 2.04), 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.