EFA vs. ICLN

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) and ICLN (iShares Global Clean Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index (Net), while ICLN is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFA returned 9.28%/yr vs 11.27%/yr for ICLN. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EFA charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for ICLN.

Performance

EFA vs. ICLN - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFA achieves a 7.13% return, which is significantly lower than ICLN's 27.81% return. Over the past 10 years, EFA has underperformed ICLN with an annualized return of 9.28%, while ICLN has yielded a comparatively higher 11.27% 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%

ICLN

• 1D: -1.50%
• 1M: -0.76%
• YTD: 27.81%
• 6M: 26.73%
• 1Y: 65.16%
• 3Y*: 5.80%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: 11.27%

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

EFA vs. ICLN - 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%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	27.81%	47.05%	-25.72%	-20.41%	-5.43%	-24.18%	141.82%	44.36%	-9.03%	21.47%

Correlation

The correlation between EFA and ICLN is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2008	0.67

The correlation between EFA and ICLN shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (1 year) to 0.67 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EFA vs. ICLN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EFA	ICLN
Financial Services	24.6%	-
Industrials	19.9%	27.8%
Healthcare	10.6%	-
Technology	10.4%	11.1%
Consumer Cyclical	7.6%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	-
Basic Materials	5.9%	1.1%
Communication Services	4.5%	-
Energy	4.0%	26.4%
Utilities	4.0%	32.8%
Real Estate	1.9%	-

Return for Risk

EFA vs. ICLN — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFA

EFA Risk / Return Rank: 38
EFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
EFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
EFA Omega Ratio Rank: 37
EFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
EFA Martin Ratio Rank: 41

ICLN

ICLN Risk / Return Rank: 80
ICLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
ICLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
ICLN Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ICLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
ICLN Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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. ICLN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN). 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	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	2.38	-1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	2.93	-1.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.37	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	5.66	-4.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.15	16.11	-9.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EFA vs. ICLN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the ICLN Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFA and ICLN, 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

	EFA	ICLN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	2.38	-1.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	0.00	+0.48
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	0.41	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	-0.09	+0.40

Drawdowns

EFA vs. ICLN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFA drawdown since its inception was -61.04%, smaller than the maximum ICLN drawdown of -87.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFA and ICLN.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFA	ICLN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.04%	-87.15%	+26.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.42%	-11.58%	+0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.05%	-43.18%	+29.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.53%	-57.16%	+27.63%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.19%	-66.75%	+32.56%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.63%	-42.82%	+40.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.93%	-66.59%	+54.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.05%	4.06%	-1.01%

Volatility

EFA vs. ICLN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) is 4.54%, while iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (ICLN) has a volatility of 12.28%. This indicates that EFA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICLN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFA	ICLN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.54%	12.28%	-7.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.82%	21.81%	-8.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.31%	27.62%	-12.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.52%	27.43%	-10.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.28%	27.31%	-10.03%

EFA vs. ICLN - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFA has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than ICLN's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFA vs. ICLN - Dividend Comparison

EFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.16%, more than ICLN's 1.28% 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%
ICLN iShares Global Clean Energy ETF	1.28%	1.63%	1.85%	1.59%	0.89%	1.18%	0.34%	1.36%	2.77%	2.49%	3.88%	2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFA and ICLN in my portfolio?

EFA and ICLN have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFA or ICLN?

ICLN has higher volatility (12.28%) compared to EFA (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFA dropped -61.04% vs ICLN's -87.15%.

Which ETF is better, EFA or ICLN?

On 10-year performance, ICLN leads with 11.27% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, EFA or ICLN?

Over the 10-year period, ICLN has performed better with a 11.27% return vs 9.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFA or ICLN?

EFA is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ICLN.

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

EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.16%, compared with 1.28% for ICLN.

What is the main difference between EFA and ICLN?

EFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while ICLN is Alternative Energy Equities. EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net), while ICLN tracks S&P Global Clean Energy Index. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for EFA and 0.39% for ICLN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.23), 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.