SFLO vs. UITB
SFLO (Victoryshares Small Cap Free Cash Flow ETF) and UITB (VictoryShares Core Intermediate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SFLO is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Victory US Small Cap Free Cash Flow Index, while UITB is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by Victory. SFLO is passively managed, while UITB is actively managed. Over the past year, SFLO returned 47.01% vs 2.00% for UITB. Their 0.16 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. SFLO charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for UITB.
Performance
SFLO vs. UITB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SFLO achieves a 30.25% return, which is significantly higher than UITB's -0.31% return.
SFLO
- 1D
- 1.87%
- 1M
- 8.45%
- 6M
- 27.60%
- YTD
- 30.25%
- 1Y
- 47.01%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 18.43%
UITB
- 1D
- 0.21%
- 1M
- -0.97%
- 6M
- -0.32%
- YTD
- -0.31%
- 1Y
- 2.00%
- 3Y*
- 4.35%
- 5Y*
- 0.05%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.18%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $5.65M | $4.19M | $2.65M | |
| $8.15M | $6.47M | $6.75M |
SFLO vs. UITB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SFLO Victoryshares Small Cap Free Cash Flow ETF | 30.25% | 11.88% | 6.54% | 0.27% |
UITB VictoryShares Core Intermediate Bond ETF | -0.31% | 7.32% | 1.81% | 0.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between SFLO and UITB is 0.26, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 21, 2023 | 0.16 |
The correlation between SFLO and UITB shifts across timeframes, from 0.16 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
SFLO vs. UITB — Risk / Return Rank
SFLO
UITB
SFLO vs. UITB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Victoryshares Small Cap Free Cash Flow ETF (SFLO) and VictoryShares Core Intermediate Bond ETF (UITB). 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.
| SFLO | UITB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.95 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.10 | +0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.05 | 0.72 | +5.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.29 | 1.82 | +18.47 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SFLO vs. UITB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SFLO drawdown since its inception was -26.63%, which is greater than UITB's maximum drawdown of -17.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SFLO and UITB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SFLO | UITB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.63% | -17.02% | -9.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.80% | -2.80% | -5.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.75% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -16.88% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.09% | +2.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.15% | -4.29% | +0.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.32% | 1.10% | +1.22% |
Volatility
SFLO vs. UITB - Volatility Comparison
Victoryshares Small Cap Free Cash Flow ETF (SFLO) has a higher volatility of 5.72% compared to VictoryShares Core Intermediate Bond ETF (UITB) at 0.96%. This indicates that SFLO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UITB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SFLO | UITB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.72% | 0.96% | +4.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.12% | 2.83% | +10.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.58% | 3.51% | +14.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.51% | 5.66% | +14.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.51% | 4.96% | +15.55% |
SFLO vs. UITB - Expense Ratio Comparison
SFLO has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than UITB's 0.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
SFLO vs. UITB - Dividend Comparison
SFLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.71%, less than UITB's 4.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SFLO Victoryshares Small Cap Free Cash Flow ETF | 0.71% | 1.04% | 1.28% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
UITB VictoryShares Core Intermediate Bond ETF | 4.24% | 4.04% | 3.89% | 3.14% | 2.32% | 1.95% | 2.79% | 3.01% | 2.99% | 0.50% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SFLO and UITB have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SFLO has higher volatility (5.72%) compared to UITB (0.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SFLO dropped -26.63% vs UITB's -17.02%.
On 1-year performance, SFLO leads with 47.01% vs 2.00% for UITB. On fees, UITB is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, UITB has been the lower-risk option at 0.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SFLO has performed better with a 47.01% return vs 2.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
UITB is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for SFLO.
UITB has the higher dividend yield at 4.24%, compared with 0.71% for SFLO.
SFLO is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while UITB is Intermediate Core Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for SFLO and 0.38% for UITB.
SFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 0.57), 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.
Find the right allocation for SFLO and UITB
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