PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
BRF vs. EWH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

BRF vs. EWH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BRF (VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF) and EWH (iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BRF is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index, while EWH is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Hong Kong Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, BRF returned 6.61%/yr vs 4.93%/yr for EWH. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BRF charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EWH.

Performance

BRF vs. EWH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) and iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BRF achieves a 5.08% return, which is significantly lower than EWH's 7.34% return. Over the past 10 years, BRF has outperformed EWH with an annualized return of 6.61%, while EWH has yielded a comparatively lower 4.93% annualized return.

BRF

1D
-4.64%
1M
-10.08%
YTD
5.08%
6M
-0.52%
1Y
20.45%
3Y*
5.49%
5Y*
-3.39%
10Y*
6.61%

EWH

1D
-1.55%
1M
-2.69%
YTD
7.34%
6M
5.91%
1Y
24.11%
3Y*
9.92%
5Y*
0.04%
10Y*
4.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BRF vs. EWH - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BRF
VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF		5.08%54.17%-35.02%37.21%-14.38%-20.40%-21.07%40.66%-12.07%54.63%
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		7.34%34.50%0.00%-13.87%-6.81%-3.49%4.17%10.74%-8.76%36.46%

Correlation

The correlation between BRF and EWH is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.35

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.33

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.37

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2009

0.44

The correlation between BRF and EWH shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (5 years) to 0.45 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BRF vs. EWH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
BRF
EWH

Consumer Cyclical

14.2%
3.7%

Real Estate

14.1%
18.7%

Industrials

13.5%
16.6%

Basic Materials

12.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

10.3%
2.7%

Utilities

9.4%
11.2%

Financial Services

8.9%
45.4%

Healthcare

6.0%

-

Energy

5.7%

-

Technology

4.0%

-

Communication Services

-

1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

BRF
14.2%
EWH
3.7%

Real Estate

BRF
14.1%
EWH
18.7%

Industrials

BRF
13.5%
EWH
16.6%

Basic Materials

BRF
12.9%
EWH

-

Consumer Defensive

BRF
10.3%
EWH
2.7%

Utilities

BRF
9.4%
EWH
11.2%

Financial Services

BRF
8.9%
EWH
45.4%

Healthcare

BRF
6.0%
EWH

-

Energy

BRF
5.7%
EWH

-

Technology

BRF
4.0%
EWH

-

Communication Services

BRF

-

EWH
1.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF

iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF

Often compared with BRF:
BRF vs. EWZBRF vs. EWZSBRF vs. FLNBRF vs. KSABRF vs. TMFCBRF vs. GDXBRF vs. FLBR
Often compared with EWH:
EWH vs. MCHIEWH vs. FXIEWH vs. EWSEWH vs. EWYEWH vs. EWTEWH vs. EWJEWH vs. EPP

Return for Risk

BRF vs. EWH — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
BRF
BRF Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
BRF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BRF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
BRF Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
BRF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
BRF Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank
EWH
EWH Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
EWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWH Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
EWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWH Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BRF vs. EWH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) and iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH). 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.

BRFEWHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.72
1.49

-0.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.14
2.13

-0.99

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.26

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.27

3.10

-1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.58

7.81

-4.23

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BRF vs. EWH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BRF Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the EWH Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BRF and EWH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

BRFEWHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

1.49

-0.77

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.11

0.00

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

0.25

-0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.06

0.18

-0.12

Drawdowns

BRF vs. EWH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRF drawdown since its inception was -82.26%, which is greater than EWH's maximum drawdown of -66.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRF and EWH.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

BRFEWHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.26%

-66.44%

-15.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.11%

-7.81%

-8.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-37.81%

-24.93%

-12.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-50.49%

-41.46%

-9.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-60.43%

-42.71%

-17.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-48.77%

-7.09%

-41.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-45.74%

-19.48%

-26.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.72%

3.09%

+2.63%

Volatility

BRF vs. EWH - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) has a higher volatility of 10.39% compared to iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) at 5.00%. This indicates that BRF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EWH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

BRFEWHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.39%

5.00%

+5.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.39%

11.71%

+12.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.46%

16.26%

+12.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.66%

20.00%

+11.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

33.94%

19.55%

+14.39%

BRF vs. EWH - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRF has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than EWH's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

BRF vs. EWH - Dividend Comparison

BRF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.28%, more than EWH's 4.84% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BRF
VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF		5.28%5.54%4.08%5.02%4.13%2.96%1.66%2.54%2.89%4.53%4.25%3.84%
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		4.84%5.20%4.17%4.28%2.91%2.78%2.56%2.71%2.93%4.35%3.08%2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

BRF and EWH have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BRF has higher volatility (10.39%) compared to EWH (5.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BRF dropped -82.26% vs EWH's -66.44%.

On 10-year performance, BRF leads with 6.61% vs 4.93% for EWH. On fees, EWH is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, EWH has been the lower-risk option at 5.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, BRF has performed better with a 6.61% return vs 4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EWH is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BRF.

BRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.28%, compared with 4.84% for EWH.

BRF is categorized as Latin America Equities, while EWH is Asia Pacific Equities. BRF tracks MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index, while EWH tracks MSCI Hong Kong Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BRF and 0.49% for EWH.

EWH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.72), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BRF and EWH

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