Screener
CFA vs XMLV
VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Wtd ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF
Key differences
- XMLV costs 0.10% less per year.
- Over the last 3 years, CFA has delivered higher annualized returns.
Side-by-side comparison
| CFA | XMLV | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.35% | 0.25% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $532M | $750M |
| Since | 2014 | 2013 |
| Dividend yield | 1.25% | 2.80% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +14.2% | +10.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +14.0% | +11.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | +7.8% | +6.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.79 | 0.63 |
| Volatility 1Y | 10.91% | 10.30% |
| Max drawdown | -37.74% | -39.86% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to CFA and XMLV
Explore further