EFA vs. RODM
EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) and RODM (Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - EFA tracks the MSCI EAFE Index (Net) while RODM tracks the Hartford Risk-Optimized Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFA returned 10.16%/yr vs 9.81%/yr for RODM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EFA charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for RODM.
Performance
EFA vs. RODM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFA achieves a 9.11% return, which is significantly lower than RODM's 10.75% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with EFA having a 10.16% annualized return and RODM not far behind at 9.81%.
EFA
- 1D
- 0.87%
- 1M
- -0.33%
- YTD
- 9.11%
- 6M
- 8.68%
- 1Y
- 21.84%
- 3Y*
- 16.84%
- 5Y*
- 8.59%
- 10Y*
- 10.16%
RODM
- 1D
- 0.72%
- 1M
- -1.64%
- YTD
- 10.75%
- 6M
- 10.29%
- 1Y
- 24.32%
- 3Y*
- 20.28%
- 5Y*
- 9.70%
- 10Y*
- 9.81%
EFA vs. RODM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF | 9.11% | 31.55% | 3.49% | 18.36% | -14.39% | 11.45% | 7.60% | 22.04% | -13.82% | 25.07% |
RODM Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF | 10.75% | 34.42% | 8.02% | 15.76% | -14.54% | 11.11% | -0.62% | 17.15% | -9.97% | 25.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between EFA and RODM is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2015 | 0.87 |
The correlation between EFA and RODM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
EFA vs. RODM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EFA
RODM
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Financial Services
EFA
RODM
Industrials
EFA
RODM
Technology
EFA
RODM
Healthcare
EFA
RODM
Consumer Cyclical
EFA
RODM
Consumer Defensive
EFA
RODM
Basic Materials
EFA
RODM
Communication Services
EFA
RODM
Energy
EFA
RODM
Utilities
EFA
RODM
Real Estate
EFA
RODM
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. RODM — Risk / Return Rank
EFA
RODM
EFA vs. RODM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) and Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM). 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 | RODM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.13 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.41 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.92 | 3.44 | -1.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.16 | 13.54 | -6.38 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EFA vs. RODM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFA drawdown since its inception was -61.04%, which is greater than RODM's maximum drawdown of -35.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFA and RODM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFA | RODM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.04% | -35.98% | -25.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.42% | -7.10% | -4.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.05% | -10.58% | -3.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.53% | -28.85% | -0.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.19% | -35.98% | +1.79% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.37% | -1.64% | +0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.91% | -6.35% | -5.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.06% | 1.80% | +1.26% |
Volatility
EFA vs. RODM - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) has a higher volatility of 5.26% compared to Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM) at 3.29%. This indicates that EFA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RODM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EFA | RODM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.26% | 3.29% | +1.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.32% | 8.78% | +4.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.62% | 10.93% | +4.69% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.58% | 13.45% | +3.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.02% | 15.07% | +1.95% |
EFA vs. RODM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EFA has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than RODM's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
EFA vs. RODM - Dividend Comparison
EFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.26%, more than RODM's 2.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF | 3.26% | 3.38% | 3.24% | 2.98% | 2.69% | 3.33% | 2.13% | 3.10% | 3.39% | 2.57% | 3.07% | 2.76% |
RODM Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF | 2.88% | 3.11% | 4.09% | 4.42% | 3.81% | 4.41% | 2.82% | 2.82% | 2.03% | 2.24% | 3.19% | 2.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EFA and RODM have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EFA has higher volatility (5.26%) compared to RODM (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFA dropped -61.04% vs RODM's -35.98%.
On 10-year performance, EFA leads with 10.16% vs 9.81% for RODM. On fees, RODM is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, RODM has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EFA has performed better with a 10.16% return vs 9.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RODM is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for EFA.
EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.26%, compared with 2.88% for RODM.
EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net), while RODM tracks Hartford Risk-Optimized Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Hartford. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for EFA and 0.29% for RODM.
RODM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.41), 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 RODM
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