EFAD vs. EFA
EFAD (ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF) and EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - EFAD tracks the MSCI EAFE Dividend Masters Index while EFA tracks the MSCI EAFE Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFAD returned 4.75%/yr vs 10.10%/yr for EFA. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EFAD charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for EFA.
Performance
EFAD vs. EFA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFAD achieves a 2.50% return, which is significantly lower than EFA's 10.63% return. Over the past 10 years, EFAD has underperformed EFA with an annualized return of 4.75%, while EFA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.10% annualized return.
EFAD
- 1D
- -0.44%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 2.50%
- 6M
- 2.81%
- 1Y
- 4.54%
- 3Y*
- 7.65%
- 5Y*
- 0.97%
- 10Y*
- 4.75%
EFA
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- 2.17%
- YTD
- 10.63%
- 6M
- 11.01%
- 1Y
- 25.29%
- 3Y*
- 17.43%
- 5Y*
- 9.14%
- 10Y*
- 10.10%
EFAD vs. EFA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFAD ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF | 2.50% | 15.87% | -1.88% | 11.91% | -21.34% | 8.41% | 8.75% | 24.66% | -11.71% | 22.14% |
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF | 10.63% | 31.55% | 3.49% | 18.36% | -14.39% | 11.45% | 7.60% | 22.04% | -13.82% | 25.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between EFAD and EFA is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2014 | 0.89 |
The correlation between EFAD and EFA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
EFAD vs. EFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EFAD
EFA
Healthcare
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Energy
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
EFAD
EFA
Technology
EFAD
EFA
Industrials
EFAD
EFA
Financial Services
EFAD
EFA
Consumer Defensive
EFAD
EFA
Basic Materials
EFAD
EFA
Utilities
EFAD
EFA
Communication Services
EFAD
EFA
Real Estate
EFAD
EFA
Energy
EFAD
EFA
Consumer Cyclical
EFAD
-
EFA
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
EFAD vs. EFA — Risk / Return Rank
EFAD
EFA
EFAD vs. EFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF (EFAD) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). 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.
| EFAD | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.77 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.30 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.45 | 2.22 | -1.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.46 | 8.31 | -6.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EFAD vs. EFA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFAD drawdown since its inception was -35.74%, smaller than the maximum EFA drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFAD and EFA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFAD | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.74% | -61.04% | +25.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.18% | -11.42% | +1.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.35% | -14.05% | +0.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.74% | -29.53% | -6.21% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.74% | -34.19% | -1.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.21% | 0.00% | -3.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.37% | -11.91% | +1.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.12% | 3.05% | +0.07% |
Volatility
EFAD vs. EFA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF (EFAD) is 3.86%, while iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that EFAD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EFAD | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.86% | 4.87% | -1.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.07% | 13.15% | -2.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.52% | 15.54% | -2.02% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.45% | 16.56% | -2.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.62% | 17.23% | -1.61% |
EFAD vs. EFA - Expense Ratio Comparison
EFAD has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EFA's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
EFAD vs. EFA - Dividend Comparison
EFAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%, less than EFA's 3.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFA iShares MSCI EAFE ETF | 3.22% | 3.38% | 3.24% | 2.98% | 2.69% | 3.33% | 2.13% | 3.10% | 3.39% | 2.57% | 3.07% | 2.76% |
EFAD ProShares MSCI EAFE Dividend Growers ETF | 2.81% | 2.83% | 2.64% | 2.29% | 1.76% | 2.98% | 1.49% | 2.05% | 2.37% | 2.42% | 2.88% | 1.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EFAD and EFA have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EFA has higher volatility (4.87%) compared to EFAD (3.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFAD dropped -35.74% vs EFA's -61.04%.
On 10-year performance, EFA leads with 10.10% vs 4.75% for EFAD. On fees, EFA is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, EFAD has been the lower-risk option at 3.86%. 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 10.10% return vs 4.75%. 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 0.50% for EFAD.
EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.22%, compared with 2.81% for EFAD.
EFAD tracks MSCI EAFE Dividend Masters Index, while EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EFAD and 0.32% for EFA.
EFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.64 vs 0.34), 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 EFAD and EFA
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