PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DBAW vs. EFAV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DBAW vs. EFAV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DBAW achieves a 16.12% return, which is significantly higher than EFAV's 3.83% return. Over the past 10 years, DBAW has outperformed EFAV with an annualized return of 11.44%, while EFAV has yielded a comparatively lower 5.93% annualized return.


DBAW

1D
-0.51%
1M
6.28%
YTD
16.12%
6M
18.39%
1Y
36.60%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.32%
10Y*
11.44%

EFAV

1D
-0.68%
1M
-1.10%
YTD
3.83%
6M
5.18%
1Y
9.41%
3Y*
12.87%
5Y*
6.17%
10Y*
5.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DBAW vs. EFAV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
DBAW
Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF
16.12%26.47%14.35%16.26%-13.35%13.08%7.44%22.96%-10.38%18.79%
EFAV
iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF
3.83%26.00%5.30%12.52%-15.11%7.20%-0.06%16.67%-5.74%22.24%

Correlation

The correlation between DBAW and EFAV is 0.60, 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

0.60

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

0.63

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

0.69

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2014

0.71

The correlation between DBAW and EFAV shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (1 year) to 0.73 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

DBAW vs. EFAV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
DBAW
EFAV

Financial Services

24.1%
19.9%

Technology

18.7%
4.5%

Industrials

15.0%
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
5.2%

Healthcare

7.2%
12.4%

Basic Materials

6.8%
1.6%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
11.5%

Energy

5.3%
8.2%

Communication Services

5.0%
9.7%

Utilities

3.2%
9.1%

Real Estate

1.5%
2.9%

Financial Services

DBAW
24.1%
EFAV
19.9%

Technology

DBAW
18.7%
EFAV
4.5%

Industrials

DBAW
15.0%
EFAV
15.1%

Consumer Cyclical

DBAW
7.9%
EFAV
5.2%

Healthcare

DBAW
7.2%
EFAV
12.4%

Basic Materials

DBAW
6.8%
EFAV
1.6%

Consumer Defensive

DBAW
5.3%
EFAV
11.5%

Energy

DBAW
5.3%
EFAV
8.2%

Communication Services

DBAW
5.0%
EFAV
9.7%

Utilities

DBAW
3.2%
EFAV
9.1%

Real Estate

DBAW
1.5%
EFAV
2.9%

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

DBAW vs. EFAV — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBAW
DBAW Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
DBAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBAW Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
DBAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBAW Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

EFAV
EFAV Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
EFAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFAV Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
EFAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFAV Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
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.

DBAW vs. EFAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). 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.


DBAWEFAVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.94

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.17

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.09

1.46

+2.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.97

4.10

+12.87

DBAW vs. EFAV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBAW Sharpe Ratio is 2.86, which is higher than the EFAV Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBAW and EFAV, 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


DBAWEFAVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.86

0.92

+1.94

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

0.53

+0.30

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.75

0.45

+0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.53

+0.10

Drawdowns

DBAW vs. EFAV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBAW drawdown since its inception was -31.44%, which is greater than EFAV's maximum drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBAW and EFAV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DBAWEFAVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.44%

-27.56%

-3.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.00%

-6.46%

-2.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.11%

-8.75%

-5.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.87%

-27.46%

+9.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.44%

-27.56%

-3.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.51%

-5.61%

+5.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.00%

-4.77%

-0.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.16%

2.30%

-0.14%

Volatility

DBAW vs. EFAV - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF (DBAW) has a higher volatility of 4.71% compared to iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) at 3.17%. This indicates that DBAW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DBAWEFAVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.71%

3.17%

+1.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.00%

8.17%

+2.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.88%

10.35%

+2.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.74%

11.79%

+1.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.28%

13.21%

+2.07%

DBAW vs. EFAV - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBAW has a 0.41% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAV's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

DBAW vs. EFAV - Dividend Comparison

DBAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, more than EFAV's 3.08% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBAW
Xtrackers MSCI All World ex US Hedged Equity ETF
3.29%3.83%1.70%3.45%8.81%2.05%2.08%2.91%2.93%2.41%1.99%5.74%
EFAV
iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF
3.08%3.20%3.24%3.08%2.53%2.47%1.33%4.19%3.34%2.45%3.94%2.49%

Frequently Asked Questions


DBAW and EFAV have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DBAW has higher volatility (4.71%) compared to EFAV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBAW dropped -31.44% vs EFAV's -27.56%.

On 10-year performance, DBAW leads with 11.44% vs 5.93% for EFAV. On fees, EFAV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, EFAV has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DBAW has performed better with a 11.44% return vs 5.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EFAV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.41% for DBAW.

DBAW has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 3.08% for EFAV.

DBAW tracks MSCI ACWI ex USA US Dollar Hedged Index, while EFAV tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.41% for DBAW and 0.20% for EFAV.

DBAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 0.92), 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 DBAW and EFAV

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