PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ENZL vs. EDEN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ENZL vs. EDEN

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

ENZL (iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF) and EDEN (iShares MSCI Denmark ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ENZL is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI New Zealand Investable Market Index, while EDEN is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ENZL returned 2.99%/yr vs 9.03%/yr for EDEN. Their 0.41 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. ENZL charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for EDEN.

Performance

ENZL vs. EDEN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) and iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ENZL achieves a 4.40% return, which is significantly higher than EDEN's 0.71% return. Over the past 10 years, ENZL has underperformed EDEN with an annualized return of 2.99%, while EDEN has yielded a comparatively higher 9.03% annualized return.

ENZL

1D
-0.93%
1M
4.18%
6M
0.69%
YTD
4.40%
1Y
7.11%
3Y*
0.97%
5Y*
-2.78%
10Y*
2.99%
ALL TIME*
7.54%

EDEN

1D
-2.33%
1M
-1.18%
6M
-5.46%
YTD
0.71%
1Y
11.69%
3Y*
4.23%
5Y*
2.08%
10Y*
9.03%
ALL TIME*
12.20%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

EDEN

iShares MSCI Denmark ETF
$542.51K$1.19M$1.06M

ENZL

iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF
$6.05M$5.22M$3.06M

ENZL vs. EDEN - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ENZL
iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF		4.40%2.47%-4.86%2.95%-16.18%-11.39%20.04%30.09%0.35%24.04%
EDEN
iShares MSCI Denmark ETF		0.71%10.58%-3.94%17.99%-11.47%14.81%42.56%24.37%-14.43%35.39%

Correlation

The correlation between ENZL and EDEN is 0.45, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.45

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.39

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.42

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2012

0.41

ENZL vs. EDEN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
ENZL
EDEN

Industrials

30.9%
29.0%

Healthcare

30.0%
38.3%

Real Estate

12.9%

-

Utilities

12.6%
3.2%

Basic Materials

4.4%
4.8%

Communication Services

3.0%

-

Energy

1.9%
0.9%

Financial Services

1.5%
15.5%

Consumer Defensive

1.4%
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

1.2%
2.8%

Technology

0.5%
0.9%

Industrials

ENZL
30.9%
EDEN
29.0%

Healthcare

ENZL
30.0%
EDEN
38.3%

Real Estate

ENZL
12.9%
EDEN

-

Utilities

ENZL
12.6%
EDEN
3.2%

Basic Materials

ENZL
4.4%
EDEN
4.8%

Communication Services

ENZL
3.0%
EDEN

-

Energy

ENZL
1.9%
EDEN
0.9%

Financial Services

ENZL
1.5%
EDEN
15.5%

Consumer Defensive

ENZL
1.4%
EDEN
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

ENZL
1.2%
EDEN
2.8%

Technology

ENZL
0.5%
EDEN
0.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF

iShares MSCI Denmark ETF

Often compared with ENZL:
ENZL vs. EIRLENZL vs. MNROENZL vs. IBC6.DEENZL vs. VTIENZL vs. EWAENZL vs. EWQENZL vs. EWY
Often compared with EDEN:
EDEN vs. EWNEDEN vs. ARGTEDEN vs. FNORXEDEN vs. EWIEDEN vs. ENOREDEN vs. EWQEDEN vs. VOO

Return for Risk

ENZL vs. EDEN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
ENZL
ENZL Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
ENZL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ENZL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
ENZL Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
ENZL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
ENZL Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank
EDEN
EDEN Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
EDEN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EDEN Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
EDEN Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
EDEN Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
EDEN Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ENZL vs. EDEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) and iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN). 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.

ENZLEDENDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.40
0.63

-0.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.66
1.02

-0.36

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.13

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.49

0.59

-0.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.30

1.37

-0.07

ENZL vs. EDEN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENZL Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the EDEN Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENZL and EDEN, 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...

Drawdowns

ENZL vs. EDEN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ENZL drawdown since its inception was -42.44%, which is greater than EDEN's maximum drawdown of -36.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENZL and EDEN.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ENZLEDENDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.44%

-36.61%

-5.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.90%

-21.17%

+8.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.67%

-29.31%

+8.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.86%

-36.61%

-0.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.44%

-36.61%

-5.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-26.11%

-10.20%

-15.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.93%

-7.41%

-5.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.83%

9.04%

-4.21%

Volatility

ENZL vs. EDEN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) is 4.20%, while iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) has a volatility of 5.77%. This indicates that ENZL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EDEN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ENZLEDENDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.20%

5.77%

-1.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.72%

15.53%

-1.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.89%

19.78%

-3.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.58%

20.37%

-1.79%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.37%

19.20%

+1.17%

ENZL vs. EDEN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ENZL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EDEN's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

ENZL vs. EDEN - Dividend Comparison

ENZL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.16%, less than EDEN's 3.04% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EDEN
iShares MSCI Denmark ETF		3.04%2.79%1.50%1.92%1.47%0.74%0.42%2.36%2.01%2.03%1.28%1.46%
ENZL
iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF		2.16%2.23%2.13%3.00%1.62%2.46%1.66%3.35%3.60%3.69%4.79%4.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

ENZL and EDEN have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EDEN has higher volatility (5.77%) compared to ENZL (4.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENZL dropped -42.44% vs EDEN's -36.61%.

On 10-year performance, EDEN leads with 9.03% vs 2.99% for ENZL. On fees, ENZL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, ENZL has been the lower-risk option at 4.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, EDEN has performed better with a 9.03% return vs 2.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ENZL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.53% for EDEN.

EDEN has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 2.16% for ENZL.

ENZL is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while EDEN is Europe Equities. ENZL tracks MSCI New Zealand Investable Market Index, while EDEN tracks MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for ENZL and 0.53% for EDEN.

EDEN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 vs 0.40), 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 ENZL and EDEN

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