EFA vs. GDXJ
EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) and GDXJ (VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index (Net), while GDXJ is a Gold fund tracking the MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFA returned 9.28%/yr vs 11.53%/yr for GDXJ. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EFA charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for GDXJ.
Performance
EFA vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFA achieves a 7.13% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -10.70% return. Over the past 10 years, EFA has underperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 9.28%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively higher 11.53% annualized return.
EFA
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- -1.04%
- YTD
- 7.13%
- 6M
- 9.67%
- 1Y
- 18.74%
- 3Y*
- 15.87%
- 5Y*
- 8.03%
- 10Y*
- 9.28%
GDXJ
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- -19.25%
- YTD
- -10.70%
- 6M
- -0.52%
- 1Y
- 50.65%
- 3Y*
- 42.13%
- 5Y*
- 15.86%
- 10Y*
- 11.53%
EFA vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF | 7.13% | 31.55% | 3.49% | 18.36% | -14.39% | 11.45% | 7.60% | 22.04% | -13.82% | 25.07% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | -10.70% | 172.28% | 15.67% | 7.12% | -14.53% | -21.25% | 30.40% | 40.44% | -11.02% | 8.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between EFA and GDXJ is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2009 | 0.33 |
The correlation between EFA and GDXJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (all time) to 0.49 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
EFA vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EFA
GDXJ
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
EFA
GDXJ
-
Industrials
EFA
GDXJ
-
Healthcare
EFA
GDXJ
-
Technology
EFA
GDXJ
-
Consumer Cyclical
EFA
GDXJ
-
Consumer Defensive
EFA
GDXJ
-
Basic Materials
EFA
GDXJ
Communication Services
EFA
GDXJ
-
Energy
EFA
GDXJ
-
Utilities
EFA
GDXJ
-
Real Estate
EFA
GDXJ
-
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
EFA vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank
EFA
GDXJ
EFA vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.
| EFA | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.20 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.65 | 1.43 | +0.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.15 | 3.72 | +2.44 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EFA | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.23 | 1.00 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.49 | 0.39 | +0.10 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.54 | 0.26 | +0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.05 | +0.26 |
Drawdowns
EFA vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFA drawdown since its inception was -61.04%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFA and GDXJ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFA | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.04% | -88.66% | +27.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.42% | -35.60% | +24.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.05% | -35.60% | +21.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.53% | -50.99% | +21.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.19% | -57.77% | +23.58% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.63% | -34.94% | +32.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.93% | -60.48% | +48.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.05% | 13.67% | -10.62% |
Volatility
EFA vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) is 4.54%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 17.66%. This indicates that EFA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EFA | GDXJ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.54% | 17.66% | -13.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.82% | 42.71% | -29.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.31% | 50.84% | -35.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.52% | 41.34% | -24.82% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.28% | 44.15% | -26.87% |
EFA vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison
EFA has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
EFA vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison
EFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.16%, more than GDXJ's 2.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF | 3.16% | 3.38% | 3.24% | 2.98% | 2.69% | 3.33% | 2.13% | 3.10% | 3.39% | 2.57% | 3.07% | 2.76% |
GDXJ VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF | 2.61% | 2.33% | 2.61% | 0.72% | 0.51% | 1.78% | 1.58% | 0.39% | 0.45% | 0.03% | 4.78% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EFA and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GDXJ has higher volatility (17.66%) compared to EFA (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFA dropped -61.04% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.
On 10-year performance, GDXJ leads with 11.53% vs 9.28% for EFA. On fees, EFA is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, EFA has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GDXJ has performed better with a 11.53% return vs 9.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EFA is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for GDXJ.
EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.16%, compared with 2.61% for GDXJ.
EFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while GDXJ is Gold. EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net), while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for EFA and 0.52% for GDXJ.
EFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.23 vs 1.00), 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 EFA and GDXJ
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