ENZL vs. EDEN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

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 3.34%/yr vs 8.04%/yr for EDEN. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. 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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ENZL achieves a -0.60% return, which is significantly higher than EDEN's -4.94% return. Over the past 10 years, ENZL has underperformed EDEN with an annualized return of 3.34%, while EDEN has yielded a comparatively higher 8.04% annualized return.

ENZL

• 1D: -1.64%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: -0.60%
• 6M: -1.29%
• 1Y: 3.15%
• 3Y*: -0.29%
• 5Y*: -4.24%
• 10Y*: 3.34%

EDEN

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: -0.76%
• YTD: -4.94%
• 6M: -1.08%
• 1Y: -2.21%
• 3Y*: 2.62%
• 5Y*: 1.78%
• 10Y*: 8.04%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ENZL vs. EDEN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ENZL iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF	-0.60%	2.47%	-4.86%	2.95%	-16.18%	-11.39%	20.04%	30.09%	0.35%	24.04%
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF	-4.94%	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 price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2012	0.41

ENZL vs. EDEN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ENZL	EDEN
Utilities	29.0%	3.9%
Healthcare	26.1%	34.8%
Industrials	19.0%	31.3%
Real Estate	12.6%	-
Basic Materials	3.8%	4.8%
Communication Services	3.7%	-
Energy	2.0%	1.1%
Financial Services	1.4%	16.2%
Consumer Cyclical	0.9%	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	4.9%
Technology	0.6%	1.1%

Return for Risk

ENZL vs. EDEN — Risk / Return Rank

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

ENZL

ENZL Risk / Return Rank: 11
ENZL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
ENZL Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
ENZL Omega Ratio Rank: 11
ENZL Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
ENZL Martin Ratio Rank: 12

EDEN

EDEN Risk / Return Rank: 7
EDEN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
EDEN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
EDEN Omega Ratio Rank: 7
EDEN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
EDEN Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

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.

	ENZL	EDEN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	-0.11	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.39	-0.00	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.00	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.25	-0.11	+0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.70	-0.22	+0.92
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ENZL vs. EDEN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENZL Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is higher than the EDEN Sharpe Ratio of -0.11. 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ENZL	EDEN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20	-0.11	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.23	0.09	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.16	0.42	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.64	-0.27

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	ENZL	EDEN	Difference
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	-29.65%	-15.24%	-14.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.78%	-7.36%	-5.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.54%	10.04%	-5.50%

Volatility

ENZL vs. EDEN - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) at 4.88%. This indicates that ENZL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EDEN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ENZL	EDEN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.01%	4.88%	+1.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.02%	15.61%	-2.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.97%	20.92%	-4.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.59%	20.21%	-1.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.44%	19.43%	+1.01%

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 2.25%, less than EDEN's 2.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF	2.93%	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	2.25%	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

Can I hold both ENZL and EDEN in my portfolio?

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.

Which is riskier, ENZL or EDEN?

ENZL has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to EDEN (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENZL dropped -42.44% vs EDEN's -36.61%.

Which ETF is better, ENZL or EDEN?

On 10-year performance, EDEN leads with 8.04% vs 3.34% for ENZL. On fees, ENZL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, EDEN has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ENZL or EDEN?

Over the 10-year period, EDEN has performed better with a 8.04% return vs 3.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ENZL or EDEN?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ENZL or EDEN?

EDEN has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 2.25% for ENZL.

What is the main difference between ENZL and EDEN?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ENZL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.20 vs -0.11), 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.