CEFA vs. MCSE
CEFA (Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF) and MCSE (Franklin Sustainable International Equity ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. CEFA is passively managed, while MCSE is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CEFA returned 15.02%/yr vs -0.12%/yr for MCSE. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CEFA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for MCSE.
Performance
CEFA vs. MCSE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEFA achieves a 10.56% return, which is significantly higher than MCSE's 1.12% return.
CEFA
- 1D
- -0.72%
- 1M
- 1.53%
- 6M
- 5.32%
- YTD
- 10.56%
- 1Y
- 22.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.02%
- 5Y*
- 7.72%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 10.97%
MCSE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 1.12%
- 1Y
- 4.30%
- 3Y*
- -0.12%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 6.07%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $214.17K | $182.86K | $268.34K | |
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
CEFA vs. MCSE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFA Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF | 10.56% | 26.46% | 5.03% | 17.40% | 10.31% |
MCSE Franklin Sustainable International Equity ETF | 1.12% | 7.79% | -9.46% | 14.86% | 10.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEFA and MCSE is 0.46, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2022 | 0.73 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CEFA and MCSE has dropped to 0.46 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
CEFA vs. MCSE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CEFA
MCSE
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
CEFA
MCSE
Industrials
CEFA
MCSE
Technology
CEFA
MCSE
Healthcare
CEFA
MCSE
Consumer Cyclical
CEFA
MCSE
Consumer Defensive
CEFA
MCSE
Basic Materials
CEFA
MCSE
Communication Services
CEFA
MCSE
Energy
CEFA
MCSE
-
Utilities
CEFA
MCSE
-
Real Estate
CEFA
MCSE
-
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
CEFA vs. MCSE — Risk / Return Rank
CEFA
MCSE
CEFA vs. MCSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) and Franklin Sustainable International Equity ETF (MCSE). 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.
| CEFA | MCSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.03 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.10 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.97 | 0.37 | +1.60 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.23 | 0.92 | +6.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CEFA vs. MCSE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.97%, which is greater than MCSE's maximum drawdown of -26.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEFA and MCSE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEFA | MCSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.97% | -26.36% | -5.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.54% | -10.42% | -1.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.45% | -26.36% | +10.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.97% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.72% | -10.51% | +9.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.90% | -8.79% | +1.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.13% | 4.36% | -1.23% |
Volatility
CEFA vs. MCSE - Volatility Comparison
Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF (CEFA) has a higher volatility of 4.70% compared to Franklin Sustainable International Equity ETF (MCSE) at 0.00%. This indicates that CEFA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEFA | MCSE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.70% | 0.00% | +4.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.09% | 1.91% | +12.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.20% | 10.71% | +5.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.70% | 19.08% | -1.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.23% | 19.08% | -1.85% |
CEFA vs. MCSE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEFA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than MCSE's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEFA vs. MCSE - Dividend Comparison
CEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, less than MCSE's 3.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEFA Global X S&P Catholic Values Developed ex-U.S. ETF | 2.68% | 2.86% | 3.26% | 2.35% | 2.35% | 3.49% | 0.84% |
MCSE Franklin Sustainable International Equity ETF | 3.74% | 3.78% | 0.63% | 0.57% | 0.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEFA and MCSE have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CEFA has higher volatility (4.70%) compared to MCSE (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEFA dropped -31.97% vs MCSE's -26.36%.
On 3-year performance, CEFA leads with 15.02% vs -0.12% for MCSE. On fees, CEFA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, MCSE has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, CEFA has performed better with a 15.02% return vs -0.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CEFA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for MCSE.
MCSE has the higher dividend yield at 3.74%, compared with 2.68% for CEFA.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Franklin. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CEFA and 0.59% for MCSE.
CEFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 0.37), 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 CEFA and MCSE
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