RODM vs. CIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RODM (Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF) and CIL (VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - RODM tracks the Hartford Risk-Optimized Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) Index while CIL tracks the Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RODM returned 8.89%/yr vs 8.21%/yr for CIL. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RODM charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CIL.

Performance

RODM vs. CIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM) 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, RODM achieves a 10.99% return, which is significantly higher than CIL's 5.44% return. Over the past 10 years, RODM has outperformed CIL with an annualized return of 8.89%, while CIL has yielded a comparatively lower 8.21% annualized return.

RODM

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 10.99%
• 6M: 14.14%
• 1Y: 25.48%
• 3Y*: 20.42%
• 5Y*: 9.57%
• 10Y*: 8.89%

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)

RODM vs. CIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RODM Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF	10.99%	34.42%	8.02%	15.76%	-14.54%	11.11%	-0.62%	17.15%	-9.97%	25.14%
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 RODM and CIL is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2015	0.71

The correlation between RODM and CIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.88 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RODM vs. CIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RODM	CIL
Financial Services	25.9%	24.8%
Industrials	16.7%	18.4%
Technology	10.5%	6.4%
Healthcare	9.1%	7.7%
Energy	6.6%	4.6%
Basic Materials	6.3%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	5.9%	8.2%
Communication Services	5.5%	5.8%
Utilities	4.9%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	8.8%
Real Estate	3.6%	2.2%

Return for Risk

RODM vs. CIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

RODM

RODM Risk / Return Rank: 73
RODM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
RODM Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
RODM Omega Ratio Rank: 73
RODM Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
RODM Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

RODM vs. CIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM) 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.

	RODM	CIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	2.24	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.35	3.22	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.49	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	3.95	-0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.50	16.75	-2.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RODM vs. CIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RODM Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is comparable to the CIL Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RODM 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

	RODM	CIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.39	2.24	+0.16
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72	0.46	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59	0.48	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.43	+0.08

Drawdowns

RODM vs. CIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RODM drawdown since its inception was -35.98%, roughly equal to the maximum CIL drawdown of -36.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RODM and CIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	RODM	CIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.98%	-36.27%	+0.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.10%	-4.60%	-2.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.58%	-11.96%	+1.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.85%	-29.89%	+1.04%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.98%	-36.27%	+0.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-0.58%	-0.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.38%	-6.56%	+0.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	1.07%	+0.69%

Volatility

RODM vs. CIL - Volatility Comparison

Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM) has a higher volatility of 3.12% compared to VictoryShares International Volatility Wtd ETF (CIL) at 0.00%. This indicates that RODM'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

	RODM	CIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.12%	0.00%	+3.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.41%	4.23%	+4.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.74%	8.19%	+2.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.43%	16.49%	-3.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.24%	17.17%	-1.93%

RODM vs. CIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RODM has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than CIL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

RODM vs. CIL - Dividend Comparison

RODM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.80%, 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%
RODM Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF	2.80%	3.11%	4.09%	4.42%	3.81%	4.41%	2.82%	2.82%	2.03%	2.24%	3.19%	2.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RODM and CIL in my portfolio?

RODM and CIL have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RODM or CIL?

RODM has higher volatility (3.12%) compared to CIL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RODM dropped -35.98% vs CIL's -36.27%.

Which ETF is better, RODM or CIL?

On 10-year performance, RODM leads with 8.89% vs 8.21% for CIL. On fees, RODM is cheaper at 0.29% 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, RODM or CIL?

Over the 10-year period, RODM has performed better with a 8.89% return vs 8.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RODM or CIL?

RODM is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CIL.

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

RODM has the higher dividend yield at 2.80%, compared with 1.67% for CIL.

What is the main difference between RODM and CIL?

RODM tracks Hartford Risk-Optimized Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) Index, while CIL tracks Nasdaq Victory International 500 Volatility Weighted Index. They also come from different issuers: Hartford and Crestview. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for RODM and 0.45% for CIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RODM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 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.