ENZL vs. EEMV
ENZL (iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF) and EEMV (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds from iShares - ENZL tracks the MSCI New Zealand Investable Market Index while EEMV tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ENZL returned 3.34%/yr vs 6.68%/yr for EEMV. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ENZL charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for EEMV.
Performance
ENZL vs. EEMV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ENZL achieves a -0.60% return, which is significantly lower than EEMV's 17.74% return. Over the past 10 years, ENZL has underperformed EEMV with an annualized return of 3.34%, while EEMV has yielded a comparatively higher 6.68% 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%
EEMV
- 1D
- -1.04%
- 1M
- 7.00%
- YTD
- 17.74%
- 6M
- 18.90%
- 1Y
- 26.57%
- 3Y*
- 14.14%
- 5Y*
- 5.59%
- 10Y*
- 6.68%
ENZL vs. EEMV - 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% |
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF | 17.74% | 13.45% | 7.98% | 7.75% | -13.94% | 5.05% | 6.90% | 7.83% | -5.81% | 27.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between ENZL and EEMV is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2011 | 0.53 |
The correlation between ENZL and EEMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.
ENZL vs. EEMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ENZL
EEMV
Utilities
Healthcare
Industrials
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Energy
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Utilities
ENZL
EEMV
Healthcare
ENZL
EEMV
Industrials
ENZL
EEMV
Real Estate
ENZL
EEMV
Basic Materials
ENZL
EEMV
Communication Services
ENZL
EEMV
Energy
ENZL
EEMV
Financial Services
ENZL
EEMV
Consumer Cyclical
ENZL
EEMV
Consumer Defensive
ENZL
EEMV
Technology
ENZL
EEMV
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
ENZL vs. EEMV — Risk / Return Rank
ENZL
EEMV
ENZL vs. EEMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV). 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 | EEMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | 1.40 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.25 | 2.89 | -2.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.70 | 10.79 | -10.09 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ENZL | EEMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 | 2.04 | -1.84 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.23 | 0.47 | -0.70 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 | 0.48 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.37 | 0.39 | -0.03 |
Drawdowns
ENZL vs. EEMV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ENZL drawdown since its inception was -42.44%, which is greater than EEMV's maximum drawdown of -31.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ENZL and EEMV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ENZL | EEMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.44% | -31.56% | -10.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.90% | -9.22% | -3.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.67% | -12.47% | -8.20% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.86% | -21.90% | -14.96% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.44% | -31.56% | -10.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -29.65% | -1.08% | -28.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.78% | -7.97% | -4.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.54% | 2.47% | +2.07% |
Volatility
ENZL vs. EEMV - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) have volatilities of 6.01% and 5.78%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ENZL | EEMV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.01% | 5.78% | +0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.02% | 11.71% | +1.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.97% | 13.06% | +2.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.59% | 11.85% | +6.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.44% | 13.86% | +6.58% |
ENZL vs. EEMV - Expense Ratio Comparison
ENZL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EEMV's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
ENZL vs. EEMV - Dividend Comparison
ENZL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, which matches EEMV's 2.25% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF | 2.25% | 2.65% | 3.50% | 2.75% | 1.93% | 2.14% | 2.45% | 2.63% | 2.46% | 2.34% | 2.79% | 2.55% |
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
ENZL and EEMV have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ENZL has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to EEMV (5.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ENZL dropped -42.44% vs EEMV's -31.56%.
On 10-year performance, EEMV leads with 6.68% vs 3.34% for ENZL. On fees, EEMV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EEMV has been the lower-risk option at 5.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EEMV has performed better with a 6.68% return vs 3.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EEMV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for ENZL.
ENZL and EEMV have nearly identical dividend yields, around 2.25%.
ENZL tracks MSCI New Zealand Investable Market Index, while EEMV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for ENZL and 0.25% for EEMV.
EEMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 0.20), 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 ENZL and EEMV
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