PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EFAV vs. KEMX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EFAV vs. KEMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFAV achieves a 4.42% return, which is significantly lower than KEMX's 40.51% return.


EFAV

1D
0.57%
1M
-1.23%
YTD
4.42%
6M
5.83%
1Y
9.78%
3Y*
13.24%
5Y*
6.29%
10Y*
5.92%

KEMX

1D
-1.23%
1M
8.82%
YTD
40.51%
6M
46.50%
1Y
75.91%
3Y*
29.24%
5Y*
13.24%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EFAV vs. KEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EFAV
iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF
4.42%26.00%5.30%12.52%-15.11%7.20%-0.06%7.99%
KEMX
KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
40.51%38.28%0.36%20.57%-19.35%10.55%12.84%7.93%

Correlation

The correlation between EFAV and KEMX is 0.50, 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

0.50

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.56

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2019

0.64

The correlation between EFAV and KEMX shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EFAV vs. KEMX - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EFAV
KEMX

Financial Services

19.9%
20.7%

Industrials

15.1%
8.6%

Healthcare

12.4%
1.7%

Consumer Defensive

11.5%
3.0%

Communication Services

9.7%
3.2%

Utilities

9.1%
2.0%

Energy

8.2%
4.8%

Consumer Cyclical

5.2%
5.4%

Technology

4.5%
41.2%

Real Estate

2.9%
1.2%

Basic Materials

1.6%
8.2%

Financial Services

EFAV
19.9%
KEMX
20.7%

Industrials

EFAV
15.1%
KEMX
8.6%

Healthcare

EFAV
12.4%
KEMX
1.7%

Consumer Defensive

EFAV
11.5%
KEMX
3.0%

Communication Services

EFAV
9.7%
KEMX
3.2%

Utilities

EFAV
9.1%
KEMX
2.0%

Energy

EFAV
8.2%
KEMX
4.8%

Consumer Cyclical

EFAV
5.2%
KEMX
5.4%

Technology

EFAV
4.5%
KEMX
41.2%

Real Estate

EFAV
2.9%
KEMX
1.2%

Basic Materials

EFAV
1.6%
KEMX
8.2%

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

EFAV vs. KEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFAV
EFAV Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
EFAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2626
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFAV Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
EFAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFAV Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

KEMX
KEMX Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
KEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
KEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
KEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
KEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EFAV vs. KEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). 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.


EFAVKEMXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.59

-0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.52

4.97

-3.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.22

19.78

-15.56

EFAV vs. KEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFAV Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the KEMX Sharpe Ratio of 3.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFAV and KEMX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EFAVKEMXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.95

3.40

-2.45

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

0.73

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.54

0.67

-0.14

Drawdowns

EFAV vs. KEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFAV drawdown since its inception was -27.56%, smaller than the maximum KEMX drawdown of -38.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFAV and KEMX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EFAVKEMXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.56%

-38.80%

+11.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.46%

-15.36%

+8.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.75%

-19.62%

+10.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.46%

-30.85%

+3.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.07%

-2.52%

-2.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.77%

-8.85%

+4.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.32%

3.85%

-1.53%

Volatility

EFAV vs. KEMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) is 3.14%, while KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) has a volatility of 9.80%. This indicates that EFAV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EFAVKEMXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.14%

9.80%

-6.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.19%

19.96%

-11.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.32%

22.44%

-12.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.79%

18.21%

-6.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.21%

20.94%

-7.73%

EFAV vs. KEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFAV has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than KEMX's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

EFAV vs. KEMX - Dividend Comparison

EFAV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, more than KEMX's 2.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EFAV
iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF
3.06%3.20%3.24%3.08%2.53%2.47%1.33%4.19%3.34%2.45%3.94%2.49%
KEMX
KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
2.33%3.28%3.39%2.00%4.10%4.79%1.69%2.77%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EFAV and KEMX have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KEMX has higher volatility (9.80%) compared to EFAV (3.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFAV dropped -27.56% vs KEMX's -38.80%.

On 5-year performance, KEMX leads with 13.24% vs 6.29% for EFAV. On fees, EFAV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, EFAV has been the lower-risk option at 3.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, KEMX has performed better with a 13.24% return vs 6.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EFAV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for KEMX.

EFAV has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 2.33% for KEMX.

EFAV tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index, while KEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for EFAV and 0.25% for KEMX.

KEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.40 vs 0.95), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EFAV and KEMX

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