PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ENZL vs. EEMV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ENZL vs. EEMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI New Zealand ETF (ENZL) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV). 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 -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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ENZL vs. EEMV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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

29.0%
4.6%

Healthcare

26.1%
6.2%

Industrials

19.0%
6.7%

Real Estate

12.6%
0.5%

Basic Materials

3.8%
3.1%

Communication Services

3.7%
11.2%

Energy

2.0%
3.4%

Financial Services

1.4%
17.7%

Consumer Cyclical

0.9%
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
6.8%

Technology

0.6%
28.9%

Utilities

ENZL
29.0%
EEMV
4.6%

Healthcare

ENZL
26.1%
EEMV
6.2%

Industrials

ENZL
19.0%
EEMV
6.7%

Real Estate

ENZL
12.6%
EEMV
0.5%

Basic Materials

ENZL
3.8%
EEMV
3.1%

Communication Services

ENZL
3.7%
EEMV
11.2%

Energy

ENZL
2.0%
EEMV
3.4%

Financial Services

ENZL
1.4%
EEMV
17.7%

Consumer Cyclical

ENZL
0.9%
EEMV
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

ENZL
0.8%
EEMV
6.8%

Technology

ENZL
0.6%
EEMV
28.9%

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

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

ENZL
ENZL Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
ENZL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ENZL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
ENZL Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
ENZL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
ENZL Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

EEMV
EEMV Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
EEMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMV Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMV Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

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.


ENZLEEMVDifference
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

ENZL vs. EEMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ENZL Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the EEMV Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ENZL and EEMV, 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


ENZLEEMVDifference

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


ENZLEEMVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-29.65%

-1.08%

-28.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.78%

-7.97%

-4.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


ENZLEEMVDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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