BIDD vs. EIS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BIDD (iShares International Dividend Active ETF) and EIS (iShares MSCI Israel ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds from iShares. BIDD is actively managed, while EIS is passively managed. Over the past year, BIDD returned 21.18% vs 54.91% for EIS. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.59% expense ratio.

Performance

BIDD vs. EIS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares International Dividend Active ETF (BIDD) and iShares MSCI Israel ETF (EIS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BIDD achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly lower than EIS's 18.19% return.

BIDD

• 1D: -0.89%
• 1M: 6.81%
• YTD: 11.59%
• 6M: 14.69%
• 1Y: 21.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EIS

• 1D: -1.92%
• 1M: -2.12%
• YTD: 18.19%
• 6M: 22.47%
• 1Y: 54.91%
• 3Y*: 37.61%
• 5Y*: 15.32%
• 10Y*: 11.97%

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

BIDD vs. EIS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BIDD iShares International Dividend Active ETF	11.59%	20.17%	-2.09%
EIS iShares MSCI Israel ETF	18.19%	45.11%	10.64%

Correlation

The correlation between BIDD and EIS is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024	0.50

The correlation between BIDD and EIS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

BIDD vs. EIS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BIDD	EIS
Financial Services	24.9%	34.6%
Technology	20.9%	17.8%
Industrials	17.7%	10.9%
Communication Services	7.2%	2.7%
Consumer Cyclical	7.2%	2.5%
Healthcare	6.4%	9.8%
Basic Materials	6.2%	1.8%
Energy	5.7%	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	2.3%
Real Estate	-	9.1%
Utilities	-	6.6%

Return for Risk

BIDD vs. EIS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BIDD

BIDD Risk / Return Rank: 39
BIDD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
BIDD Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
BIDD Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BIDD Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
BIDD Martin Ratio Rank: 41

EIS

EIS Risk / Return Rank: 76
EIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
EIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
EIS Omega Ratio Rank: 68
EIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EIS Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

BIDD vs. EIS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares International Dividend Active ETF (BIDD) and iShares MSCI Israel ETF (EIS). 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.

	BIDD	EIS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	2.45	-1.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	3.36	-1.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.42	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	4.45	-2.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.40	16.54	-10.14
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BIDD vs. EIS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BIDD Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is lower than the EIS Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BIDD and EIS, 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

	BIDD	EIS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.40	2.45	-1.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.71	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.57	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.16	0.33	+0.83

Drawdowns

BIDD vs. EIS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BIDD drawdown since its inception was -15.08%, smaller than the maximum EIS drawdown of -51.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BIDD and EIS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BIDD	EIS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.08%	-51.94%	+36.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.32%	-12.40%	+0.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.10%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-41.88%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.88%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.89%	-5.56%	+4.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.25%	-13.90%	+11.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.32%	3.33%	-0.01%

Volatility

BIDD vs. EIS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares International Dividend Active ETF (BIDD) is 5.95%, while iShares MSCI Israel ETF (EIS) has a volatility of 6.64%. This indicates that BIDD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EIS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BIDD	EIS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.95%	6.64%	-0.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.78%	16.05%	-3.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.25%	22.56%	-7.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	21.81%	-4.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	21.08%	-4.19%

BIDD vs. EIS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BIDD and EIS have an expense ratio of 0.59%.

Dividends

BIDD vs. EIS - Dividend Comparison

BIDD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.48%, more than EIS's 1.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BIDD iShares International Dividend Active ETF	2.48%	2.74%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EIS iShares MSCI Israel ETF	1.22%	1.44%	1.38%	1.39%	1.66%	1.04%	0.16%	2.06%	0.87%	2.02%	1.78%	2.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BIDD and EIS in my portfolio?

BIDD and EIS have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BIDD or EIS?

EIS has higher volatility (6.64%) compared to BIDD (5.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BIDD dropped -15.08% vs EIS's -51.94%.

Which ETF is better, BIDD or EIS?

On 1-year performance, EIS leads with 54.91% vs 21.18% for BIDD. Both ETFs have the same 0.59% expense ratio. On volatility, BIDD has been the lower-risk option at 5.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BIDD or EIS?

Over the 1-year period, EIS has performed better with a 54.91% return vs 21.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BIDD or EIS?

BIDD and EIS have the same expense ratio: 0.59% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BIDD or EIS?

BIDD has the higher dividend yield at 2.48%, compared with 1.22% for EIS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EIS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 1.40), 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.