DUKX vs. EFAV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DUKX (Ocean Park International ETF) and EFAV (iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. DUKX is actively managed, while EFAV is passively managed. Over the past year, DUKX returned 27.12% vs 9.41% for EFAV. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DUKX charges 1.03%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for EFAV.

Performance

DUKX vs. EFAV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ocean Park International ETF (DUKX) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DUKX achieves a 10.68% return, which is significantly higher than EFAV's 3.83% return.

DUKX

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: 4.42%
• YTD: 10.68%
• 6M: 12.70%
• 1Y: 27.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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)

DUKX vs. EFAV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
DUKX Ocean Park International ETF	10.68%	11.07%	-3.54%
EFAV iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF	3.83%	26.00%	0.35%

Correlation

The correlation between DUKX and EFAV is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 12, 2024	0.66

The correlation between DUKX and EFAV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

DUKX vs. EFAV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DUKX	EFAV
Financial Services	22.8%	19.9%
Technology	19.9%	4.5%
Industrials	13.0%	15.1%
Basic Materials	8.8%	1.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.2%	5.2%
Healthcare	5.9%	12.4%
Communication Services	5.3%	9.7%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	11.5%
Energy	4.7%	8.2%
Utilities	3.3%	9.1%
Real Estate	2.8%	2.9%

Return for Risk

DUKX vs. EFAV — Risk / Return Rank

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

DUKX

DUKX Risk / Return Rank: 57
DUKX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
DUKX Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
DUKX Omega Ratio Rank: 62
DUKX Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
DUKX Martin Ratio Rank: 48

EFAV

EFAV Risk / Return Rank: 26
EFAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EFAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EFAV Omega Ratio Rank: 24
EFAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EFAV Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

DUKX vs. EFAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ocean Park International ETF (DUKX) 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.

	DUKX	EFAV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.02	0.92	+1.10
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	1.33	+1.36
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.17	+0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	1.46	+1.41
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.95	4.10	+3.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DUKX vs. EFAV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DUKX Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is higher than the EFAV Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DUKX 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DUKX	EFAV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.02	0.92	+1.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.45	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.67	0.53	+0.14

Drawdowns

DUKX vs. EFAV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DUKX drawdown since its inception was -19.52%, smaller than the maximum EFAV drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DUKX and EFAV.

Drawdown Indicators

	DUKX	EFAV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.52%	-27.56%	+8.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.48%	-6.46%	-3.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-8.75%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.46%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.90%	-5.61%	+3.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.47%	-4.77%	-0.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.42%	2.30%	+1.12%

Volatility

DUKX vs. EFAV - Volatility Comparison

Ocean Park International ETF (DUKX) has a higher volatility of 5.54% compared to iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) at 3.17%. This indicates that DUKX'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.

Volatility by Period

	DUKX	EFAV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.54%	3.17%	+2.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.00%	8.17%	+2.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.49%	10.35%	+3.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.15%	11.79%	+2.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.15%	13.21%	+0.94%

DUKX vs. EFAV - Expense Ratio Comparison

DUKX has a 1.03% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAV's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

DUKX vs. EFAV - Dividend Comparison

DUKX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, less than EFAV's 3.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DUKX Ocean Park International ETF	2.24%	2.65%	1.93%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both DUKX and EFAV in my portfolio?

DUKX and EFAV have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DUKX or EFAV?

DUKX has higher volatility (5.54%) compared to EFAV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DUKX dropped -19.52% vs EFAV's -27.56%.

Which ETF is better, DUKX or EFAV?

On 1-year performance, DUKX leads with 27.12% vs 9.41% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, DUKX or EFAV?

Over the 1-year period, DUKX has performed better with a 27.12% return vs 9.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DUKX or EFAV?

EFAV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 1.03% for DUKX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DUKX or EFAV?

EFAV has the higher dividend yield at 3.08%, compared with 2.24% for DUKX.

What is the main difference between DUKX and EFAV?

They also come from different issuers: Ocean Park and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.03% for DUKX and 0.20% for EFAV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DUKX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 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.