DWMF vs. EFAS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DWMF (WisdomTree International Multifactor Fund) and EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. DWMF is actively managed, while EFAS is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DWMF returned 8.70%/yr vs 12.16%/yr for EFAS. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DWMF charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for EFAS.

Performance

DWMF vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree International Multifactor Fund (DWMF) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DWMF achieves a 5.12% return, which is significantly lower than EFAS's 12.32% return.

DWMF

• 1D: -2.08%
• 1M: 1.38%
• YTD: 5.12%
• 6M: 4.50%
• 1Y: 11.72%
• 3Y*: 14.20%
• 5Y*: 8.70%
• 10Y*: —

EFAS

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: -2.81%
• YTD: 12.32%
• 6M: 12.80%
• 1Y: 26.33%
• 3Y*: 24.76%
• 5Y*: 12.16%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DWMF vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
DWMF WisdomTree International Multifactor Fund	5.12%	24.42%	10.22%	10.78%	-7.31%	11.24%	-1.18%	16.10%	-7.26%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	12.32%	46.83%	3.07%	14.65%	-8.00%	12.75%	-5.42%	14.60%	-10.70%

Correlation

The correlation between DWMF and EFAS is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 10, 2018	0.69

The correlation between DWMF and EFAS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

DWMF vs. EFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DWMF	EFAS
Financial Services	19.9%	31.0%
Industrials	19.1%	10.4%
Consumer Defensive	11.3%	8.1%
Communication Services	9.4%	8.6%
Healthcare	9.1%	0.1%
Utilities	8.9%	13.7%
Real Estate	6.3%	11.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.8%	1.9%
Technology	4.5%	0.1%
Basic Materials	3.9%	1.7%
Energy	1.9%	13.1%

Return for Risk

DWMF vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DWMF

DWMF Risk / Return Rank: 29
DWMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
DWMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
DWMF Omega Ratio Rank: 29
DWMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
DWMF Martin Ratio Rank: 28

EFAS

EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 79
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 75
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

DWMF vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree International Multifactor Fund (DWMF) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). 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.

	DWMF	EFAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.01	2.42	-1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.49	3.41	-1.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.42	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.35	4.99	-3.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.70	12.82	-9.12

DWMF vs. EFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DWMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is lower than the EFAS Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DWMF and EFAS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DWMF vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DWMF drawdown since its inception was -29.72%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DWMF and EFAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DWMF	EFAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.72%	-44.38%	+14.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.74%	-5.30%	-3.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.74%	-11.84%	+3.10%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.00%	-28.81%	+11.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.17%	-3.56%	-0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.90%	-7.05%	+3.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.18%	2.06%	+1.12%

Volatility

DWMF vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison

WisdomTree International Multifactor Fund (DWMF) has a higher volatility of 4.71% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 3.52%. This indicates that DWMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DWMF	EFAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.71%	3.52%	+1.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.58%	8.69%	+0.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.64%	10.95%	+0.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.37%	15.59%	-4.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.14%	18.31%	-4.17%

DWMF vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DWMF has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than EFAS's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

DWMF vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

DWMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.83%, less than EFAS's 4.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
DWMF WisdomTree International Multifactor Fund	2.83%	2.80%	3.50%	4.01%	3.41%	3.54%	2.06%	2.77%	1.15%	0.00%	0.00%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	4.75%	4.83%	6.76%	6.33%	7.28%	5.19%	4.34%	5.75%	6.63%	6.15%	0.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DWMF and EFAS in my portfolio?

DWMF and EFAS have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DWMF or EFAS?

DWMF has higher volatility (4.71%) compared to EFAS (3.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DWMF dropped -29.72% vs EFAS's -44.38%.

Which ETF is better, DWMF or EFAS?

On 5-year performance, EFAS leads with 12.16% vs 8.70% for DWMF. On fees, DWMF is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 3.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DWMF or EFAS?

Over the 5-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 12.16% return vs 8.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DWMF or EFAS?

DWMF is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for EFAS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DWMF or EFAS?

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.75%, compared with 2.83% for DWMF.

What is the main difference between DWMF and EFAS?

They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for DWMF and 0.56% for EFAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.01), 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.