CWO.NEO vs. BRF
CWO.NEO (iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF) and BRF (VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CWO.NEO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index, while BRF is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWO.NEO returned 11.24%/yr vs 7.38%/yr for BRF. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CWO.NEO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for BRF.
Performance
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CWO.NEO is traded in CAD, while BRF is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the BRF values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CWO.NEO achieves a 13.27% return, which is significantly higher than BRF's 6.97% return. Over the past 10 years, CWO.NEO has outperformed BRF with an annualized return of 11.24%, while BRF has yielded a comparatively lower 7.38% annualized return.
CWO.NEO
- 1D
- -0.47%
- 1M
- 2.68%
- YTD
- 13.27%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- 1Y
- 33.89%
- 3Y*
- 22.83%
- 5Y*
- 11.44%
- 10Y*
- 11.24%
BRF
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- -9.69%
- YTD
- 6.97%
- 6M
- -1.99%
- 1Y
- 23.08%
- 3Y*
- 6.56%
- 5Y*
- -0.53%
- 10Y*
- 7.38%
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF | 13.27% | 26.34% | 22.33% | 9.56% | -9.03% | 7.13% | -3.12% | 10.86% | -0.29% | 17.16% |
BRF VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF | 6.97% | 47.10% | -29.44% | 34.18% | -8.28% | -21.12% | -22.41% | 33.74% | -4.61% | 44.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between CWO.NEO and BRF is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2009 | 0.50 |
The correlation between CWO.NEO and BRF shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (5 years) to 0.53 (1 year), 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
CWO.NEO vs. BRF — Risk / Return Rank
CWO.NEO
BRF
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF). 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.
| CWO.NEO | BRF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.17 | +0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.12 | 1.46 | +1.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.86 | 4.07 | +7.79 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CWO.NEO | BRF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.20 | 0.85 | +1.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 | -0.02 | +0.71 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.64 | 0.23 | +0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 0.08 | +0.37 |
Drawdowns
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CWO.NEO drawdown since its inception was -31.99%, smaller than the maximum BRF drawdown of -74.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWO.NEO and BRF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CWO.NEO | BRF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.99% | -74.70% | +42.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.90% | -15.88% | +4.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.12% | -31.91% | +14.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.80% | -43.41% | +18.61% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -31.97% | -56.24% | +24.27% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.89% | -28.48% | +26.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.28% | -36.36% | +26.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.86% | 5.69% | -2.83% |
Volatility
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) is 5.38%, while VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) has a volatility of 9.79%. This indicates that CWO.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BRF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CWO.NEO | BRF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.38% | 9.79% | -4.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.46% | 23.86% | -11.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.50% | 27.43% | -11.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.64% | 29.69% | -13.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.51% | 31.71% | -14.20% |
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CWO.NEO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than BRF's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
CWO.NEO vs. BRF - Dividend Comparison
CWO.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.46%, less than BRF's 5.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BRF VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF | 5.25% | 5.54% | 4.08% | 5.02% | 4.13% | 2.96% | 1.66% | 2.54% | 2.89% | 4.53% | 4.25% | 3.84% |
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF | 2.46% | 2.79% | 3.50% | 4.14% | 5.03% | 4.61% | 2.64% | 3.01% | 3.22% | 2.60% | 2.57% | 3.23% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CWO.NEO and BRF have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BRF is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BRF is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CWO.NEO.
CWO.NEO is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while BRF is Latin America Equities. CWO.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index, while BRF tracks MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for CWO.NEO and 0.60% for BRF.
Find the right allocation for CWO.NEO and BRF
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