COST vs. IEFA
COST (Costco Wholesale Corporation) is a stock, while IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) is Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net). Over the past 10 years, COST returned 22.27%/yr vs 9.90%/yr for IEFA. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
COST vs. IEFA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, COST achieves a 14.24% return, which is significantly higher than IEFA's 9.51% return. Over the past 10 years, COST has outperformed IEFA with an annualized return of 22.27%, while IEFA has yielded a comparatively lower 9.90% annualized return.
COST
- 1D
- 0.68%
- 1M
- -5.66%
- YTD
- 14.24%
- 6M
- 11.38%
- 1Y
- -0.24%
- 3Y*
- 25.12%
- 5Y*
- 22.12%
- 10Y*
- 22.27%
IEFA
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 1.09%
- YTD
- 9.51%
- 6M
- 11.08%
- 1Y
- 22.43%
- 3Y*
- 16.31%
- 5Y*
- 8.10%
- 10Y*
- 9.90%
COST vs. IEFA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation | 14.24% | -5.39% | 39.62% | 49.00% | -19.05% | 51.82% | 32.67% | 45.70% | 10.60% | 22.37% |
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | 9.51% | 32.08% | 3.26% | 17.95% | -15.24% | 11.63% | 8.18% | 22.64% | -14.14% | 26.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between COST and IEFA is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2012 | 0.37 |
The correlation between COST and IEFA shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.37 (all time), 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
COST vs. IEFA — Risk / Return Rank
COST
IEFA
COST vs. IEFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA). 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.
| COST | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.43 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.95 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.25 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.10 | 1.83 | -1.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.22 | 6.93 | -7.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
COST vs. IEFA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COST drawdown since its inception was -53.39%, which is greater than IEFA's maximum drawdown of -34.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COST and IEFA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COST | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.39% | -34.78% | -18.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.14% | -11.50% | -3.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.74% | -13.76% | -6.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -31.40% | -30.41% | -0.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.40% | -34.78% | +3.38% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.23% | -0.60% | -9.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -6.68% | -6.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.67% | 3.03% | +3.64% |
Volatility
COST vs. IEFA - Volatility Comparison
Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) has a higher volatility of 7.44% compared to iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) at 5.50%. This indicates that COST's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IEFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COST | IEFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.44% | 5.50% | +1.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.53% | 13.11% | +1.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.80% | 15.54% | +3.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.72% | 16.61% | +6.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.95% | 17.31% | +4.64% |
Dividends
COST vs. IEFA - Dividend Comparison
COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, less than IEFA's 3.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COST Costco Wholesale Corporation | 0.55% | 0.59% | 0.49% | 2.87% | 0.76% | 0.54% | 3.38% | 0.86% | 1.08% | 4.81% | 1.09% | 4.06% |
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | 3.24% | 3.55% | 3.47% | 3.20% | 2.70% | 3.32% | 1.90% | 3.18% | 3.46% | 2.57% | 2.96% | 2.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COST and IEFA have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
COST has higher volatility (7.44%) compared to IEFA (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COST dropped -53.39% vs IEFA's -34.78%.
IEFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs -0.08), 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 COST and IEFA
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