EFA vs. EFG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) and EFG (iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds from iShares - EFA tracks the MSCI EAFE Index (Net) while EFG tracks the MSCI EAFE Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFA returned 9.87%/yr vs 8.64%/yr for EFG. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. EFA charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for EFG.

Performance

EFA vs. EFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFA achieves a 8.38% return, which is significantly higher than EFG's 7.78% return. Over the past 10 years, EFA has outperformed EFG with an annualized return of 9.87%, while EFG has yielded a comparatively lower 8.64% annualized return.

EFA

• 1D: -2.03%
• 1M: 0.10%
• YTD: 8.38%
• 6M: 8.09%
• 1Y: 21.83%
• 3Y*: 16.63%
• 5Y*: 8.49%
• 10Y*: 9.87%

EFG

• 1D: -2.87%
• 1M: 1.07%
• YTD: 7.78%
• 6M: 7.24%
• 1Y: 15.20%
• 3Y*: 11.33%
• 5Y*: 4.16%
• 10Y*: 8.64%

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

EFA vs. EFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF	8.38%	31.55%	3.49%	18.36%	-14.39%	11.45%	7.60%	22.04%	-13.82%	25.07%
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF	7.78%	20.70%	1.53%	17.55%	-23.12%	11.01%	17.85%	27.47%	-12.93%	28.86%

Correlation

The correlation between EFA and EFG is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2005	0.97

The correlation between EFA and EFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFA vs. EFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EFA	EFG
Financial Services	24.4%	11.3%
Industrials	18.4%	28.3%
Technology	12.3%	20.3%
Healthcare	10.1%	13.2%
Consumer Cyclical	7.4%	9.1%
Consumer Defensive	6.9%	3.7%
Basic Materials	6.2%	6.0%
Communication Services	4.5%	5.2%
Energy	3.7%	0.5%
Utilities	3.7%	1.5%
Real Estate	1.6%	0.7%

Return for Risk

EFA vs. EFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFA

EFA Risk / Return Rank: 42
EFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
EFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
EFA Omega Ratio Rank: 41
EFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
EFA Martin Ratio Rank: 45

EFG

EFG Risk / Return Rank: 26
EFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
EFG Omega Ratio Rank: 23
EFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
EFG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

EFA vs. EFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG). 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.

	EFA	EFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	0.84	+0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.02	1.30	+0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.16	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	1.19	+0.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.16	4.39	+2.78

EFA vs. EFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is higher than the EFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFA and EFG, 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

EFA vs. EFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFA drawdown since its inception was -61.04%, roughly equal to the maximum EFG drawdown of -58.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFA and EFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFA	EFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.04%	-58.40%	-2.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.42%	-12.78%	+1.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.05%	-16.87%	+2.82%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.53%	-35.78%	+6.25%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.19%	-35.78%	+1.59%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.03%	-2.87%	+0.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.91%	-12.13%	+0.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.05%	3.47%	-0.42%

Volatility

EFA vs. EFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) is 5.30%, while iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) has a volatility of 7.05%. This indicates that EFA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFA	EFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.30%	7.05%	-1.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.31%	15.65%	-2.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.65%	18.14%	-2.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.58%	18.33%	-1.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.03%	17.59%	-0.56%

EFA vs. EFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFA has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than EFG's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFA vs. EFG - Dividend Comparison

EFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.28%, more than EFG's 2.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF	3.28%	3.38%	3.24%	2.98%	2.69%	3.33%	2.13%	3.10%	3.39%	2.57%	3.07%	2.76%
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF	2.29%	2.53%	1.64%	1.63%	1.27%	1.54%	0.85%	1.69%	1.98%	1.56%	2.20%	1.75%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFA and EFG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, EFA and EFG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EFA or EFG?

EFG has higher volatility (7.05%) compared to EFA (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFA dropped -61.04% vs EFG's -58.40%.

Which ETF is better, EFA or EFG?

On 10-year performance, EFA leads with 9.87% vs 8.64% for EFG. On fees, EFA is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, EFA has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFA or EFG?

Over the 10-year period, EFA has performed better with a 9.87% return vs 8.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFA or EFG?

EFA is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EFA or EFG?

EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.28%, compared with 2.29% for EFG.

What is the main difference between EFA and EFG?

EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net), while EFG tracks MSCI EAFE Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for EFA and 0.40% for EFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 0.84), 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.