EDEN vs. EWN
EDEN (iShares MSCI Denmark ETF) and EWN (iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF) are both Europe Equities funds from iShares - EDEN tracks the MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index while EWN tracks the MSCI Netherlands Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EDEN returned 9.34%/yr vs 14.69%/yr for EWN. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EDEN charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for EWN.
Performance
EDEN vs. EWN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDEN achieves a -3.26% return, which is significantly lower than EWN's 25.13% return. Over the past 10 years, EDEN has underperformed EWN with an annualized return of 9.34%, while EWN has yielded a comparatively higher 14.69% annualized return.
EDEN
- 1D
- 2.17%
- 1M
- -1.56%
- YTD
- -3.26%
- 6M
- -1.59%
- 1Y
- -1.90%
- 3Y*
- 3.26%
- 5Y*
- 2.39%
- 10Y*
- 9.34%
EWN
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 6.77%
- YTD
- 25.13%
- 6M
- 25.18%
- 1Y
- 42.77%
- 3Y*
- 22.72%
- 5Y*
- 10.62%
- 10Y*
- 14.69%
EDEN vs. EWN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF | -3.26% | 10.58% | -3.94% | 17.99% | -11.47% | 14.81% | 42.56% | 24.37% | -14.43% | 35.39% |
EWN iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF | 25.13% | 34.87% | 1.67% | 22.08% | -24.43% | 22.74% | 23.23% | 32.45% | -15.37% | 33.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDEN and EWN is 0.61, 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 | 0.61 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2012 | 0.70 |
The correlation between EDEN and EWN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.
EDEN vs. EWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EDEN
EWN
Healthcare
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Technology
Communication Services
-
Real Estate
-
Healthcare
EDEN
EWN
Industrials
EDEN
EWN
Financial Services
EDEN
EWN
Consumer Defensive
EDEN
EWN
Basic Materials
EDEN
EWN
Utilities
EDEN
EWN
-
Consumer Cyclical
EDEN
EWN
Energy
EDEN
EWN
Technology
EDEN
EWN
Communication Services
EDEN
-
EWN
Real Estate
EDEN
-
EWN
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
EDEN vs. EWN — Risk / Return Rank
EDEN
EWN
EDEN vs. EWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) and iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN). 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.
| EDEN | EWN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.89 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.35 | -0.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.09 | 3.25 | -3.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.19 | 12.31 | -12.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EDEN vs. EWN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDEN drawdown since its inception was -36.61%, smaller than the maximum EWN drawdown of -65.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDEN and EWN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDEN | EWN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.61% | -65.22% | +28.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.17% | -13.24% | -7.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.31% | -19.77% | -9.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.61% | -43.57% | +6.96% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.61% | -43.57% | +6.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.74% | -0.24% | -13.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.38% | -16.32% | +8.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.78% | 3.49% | +6.29% |
Volatility
EDEN vs. EWN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) is 4.82%, while iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF (EWN) has a volatility of 7.78%. This indicates that EDEN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EDEN | EWN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.82% | 7.78% | -2.96% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.74% | 17.59% | -1.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.76% | 20.71% | +0.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.28% | 23.08% | -2.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.38% | 21.41% | -2.03% |
EDEN vs. EWN - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDEN has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is higher than EWN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDEN vs. EWN - Dividend Comparison
EDEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, less than EWN's 4.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF | 3.17% | 2.79% | 1.50% | 1.92% | 1.47% | 0.74% | 0.42% | 2.36% | 2.01% | 2.03% | 1.28% | 1.46% |
EWN iShares MSCI Netherlands ETF | 4.01% | 5.03% | 2.18% | 1.79% | 1.98% | 1.01% | 0.78% | 2.57% | 2.40% | 1.68% | 2.71% | 1.92% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EDEN and EWN have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EWN has higher volatility (7.78%) compared to EDEN (4.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDEN dropped -36.61% vs EWN's -65.22%.
On 10-year performance, EWN leads with 14.69% vs 9.34% for EDEN. On fees, EWN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, EDEN has been the lower-risk option at 4.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EWN has performed better with a 14.69% return vs 9.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EWN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for EDEN.
EWN has the higher dividend yield at 4.01%, compared with 3.17% for EDEN.
EDEN tracks MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index, while EWN tracks MSCI Netherlands Investable Market Index. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for EDEN and 0.50% for EWN.
EWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs -0.09), 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 EDEN and EWN
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