EFG vs. RODM
EFG (iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF) and RODM (Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - EFG tracks the MSCI EAFE Growth Index while RODM tracks the Hartford Risk-Optimized Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EFG returned 8.89%/yr vs 9.81%/yr for RODM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EFG charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for RODM.
Performance
EFG vs. RODM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFG achieves a 8.93% return, which is significantly lower than RODM's 10.75% return. Over the past 10 years, EFG has underperformed RODM with an annualized return of 8.89%, while RODM has yielded a comparatively higher 9.81% annualized return.
EFG
- 1D
- 1.13%
- 1M
- 0.94%
- YTD
- 8.93%
- 6M
- 8.22%
- 1Y
- 15.38%
- 3Y*
- 11.75%
- 5Y*
- 4.35%
- 10Y*
- 8.89%
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%
EFG vs. RODM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF | 8.93% | 20.70% | 1.53% | 17.55% | -23.12% | 11.01% | 17.85% | 27.47% | -12.93% | 28.86% |
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 EFG and RODM is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2015 | 0.83 |
The correlation between EFG and RODM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
EFG vs. RODM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EFG
RODM
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Energy
Industrials
EFG
RODM
Technology
EFG
RODM
Healthcare
EFG
RODM
Financial Services
EFG
RODM
Consumer Cyclical
EFG
RODM
Basic Materials
EFG
RODM
Communication Services
EFG
RODM
Consumer Defensive
EFG
RODM
Utilities
EFG
RODM
Real Estate
EFG
RODM
Energy
EFG
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
EFG vs. RODM — Risk / Return Rank
EFG
RODM
EFG vs. RODM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) 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.
| EFG | RODM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.41 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.21 | 3.44 | -2.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.43 | 13.54 | -9.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EFG vs. RODM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFG drawdown since its inception was -58.40%, which is greater than RODM's maximum drawdown of -35.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFG and RODM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFG | RODM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.40% | -35.98% | -22.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.78% | -7.10% | -5.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.87% | -10.58% | -6.29% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.78% | -28.85% | -6.93% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.78% | -35.98% | +0.20% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.83% | -1.64% | -0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.12% | -6.35% | -5.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.48% | 1.80% | +1.68% |
Volatility
EFG vs. RODM - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) has a higher volatility of 7.04% compared to Hartford Multifactor Developed Markets (ex-US) ETF (RODM) at 3.29%. This indicates that EFG'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
| EFG | RODM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.04% | 3.29% | +3.75% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.67% | 8.78% | +6.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.11% | 10.93% | +7.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.33% | 13.45% | +4.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.59% | 15.07% | +2.52% |
EFG vs. RODM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EFG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than RODM's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
EFG vs. RODM - Dividend Comparison
EFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.26%, less than RODM's 2.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF | 2.26% | 2.53% | 1.64% | 1.63% | 1.27% | 1.54% | 0.85% | 1.69% | 1.98% | 1.56% | 2.20% | 1.75% |
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
EFG and RODM have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EFG has higher volatility (7.04%) compared to RODM (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFG dropped -58.40% vs RODM's -35.98%.
On 10-year performance, RODM leads with 9.81% vs 8.89% for EFG. 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, RODM has performed better with a 9.81% return vs 8.89%. 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 0.40% for EFG.
RODM has the higher dividend yield at 2.88%, compared with 2.26% for EFG.
EFG tracks MSCI EAFE Growth Index, 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: 0.40% for EFG and 0.29% for RODM.
RODM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 0.85), 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 EFG 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