EWA vs. EZA

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EWA (iShares MSCI-Australia ETF) and EZA (iShares MSCI South Africa ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Australia Index, while EZA is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI South Africa Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWA returned 8.75%/yr vs 8.12%/yr for EZA. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for EZA.

Performance

EWA vs. EZA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWA achieves a 11.57% return, which is significantly higher than EZA's -2.81% return. Over the past 10 years, EWA has outperformed EZA with an annualized return of 8.75%, while EZA has yielded a comparatively lower 8.12% annualized return.

EWA

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: -0.20%
• YTD: 11.57%
• 6M: 12.06%
• 1Y: 14.64%
• 3Y*: 11.97%
• 5Y*: 5.57%
• 10Y*: 8.75%

EZA

• 1D: 0.89%
• 1M: -5.12%
• YTD: -2.81%
• 6M: 2.77%
• 1Y: 33.90%
• 3Y*: 23.45%
• 5Y*: 9.50%
• 10Y*: 8.12%

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

EWA vs. EZA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EWA iShares MSCI-Australia ETF	11.57%	13.35%	1.60%	13.81%	-5.92%	8.93%	8.29%	22.45%	-12.04%	19.88%
EZA iShares MSCI South Africa ETF	-2.81%	75.20%	7.16%	1.51%	-5.18%	7.91%	-5.19%	9.83%	-25.24%	36.03%

Correlation

The correlation between EWA and EZA is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2003	0.66

The correlation between EWA and EZA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWA vs. EZA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWA	EZA
Financial Services	43.6%	32.1%
Basic Materials	23.0%	39.7%
Consumer Cyclical	6.1%	14.7%
Real Estate	5.0%	1.6%
Healthcare	4.9%	1.2%
Energy	4.5%	-
Industrials	4.5%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	2.4%
Communication Services	2.0%	6.7%
Utilities	1.7%	-
Technology	1.1%	-

Return for Risk

EWA vs. EZA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWA

EWA Risk / Return Rank: 26
EWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EWA Omega Ratio Rank: 23
EWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
EWA Martin Ratio Rank: 29

EZA

EZA Risk / Return Rank: 29
EZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
EZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
EZA Omega Ratio Rank: 30
EZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
EZA Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

EWA vs. EZA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA). 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.

	EWA	EZA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.77	0.95	-0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.15	1.41	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.18	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.33	1.31	+0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.68	3.41	+0.27

EWA vs. EZA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is comparable to the EZA Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWA and EZA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EWA vs. EZA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWA drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, roughly equal to the maximum EZA drawdown of -64.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWA and EZA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWA	EZA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.98%	-64.64%	-2.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-23.31%	+13.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.91%	-23.31%	+1.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.87%	-34.94%	+10.07%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.54%	-62.25%	+16.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.44%	-18.05%	+14.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.32%	-16.92%	+5.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.62%	8.93%	-5.31%

Volatility

EWA vs. EZA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) is 5.80%, while iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) has a volatility of 11.34%. This indicates that EWA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EWA	EZA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.80%	11.34%	-5.54%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.62%	27.03%	-12.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.40%	31.92%	-14.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.80%	28.86%	-9.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.62%	31.43%	-8.81%

EWA vs. EZA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EZA's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWA vs. EZA - Dividend Comparison

EWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.88%, less than EZA's 6.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EWA iShares MSCI-Australia ETF	2.88%	3.21%	3.71%	3.72%	5.28%	5.08%	2.02%	3.97%	6.11%	4.44%	4.03%	5.48%
EZA iShares MSCI South Africa ETF	6.34%	6.16%	7.26%	2.84%	3.90%	2.05%	5.51%	12.27%	3.81%	1.55%	4.10%	3.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EWA and EZA in my portfolio?

EWA and EZA have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWA or EZA?

EZA has higher volatility (11.34%) compared to EWA (5.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWA dropped -66.98% vs EZA's -64.64%.

Which ETF is better, EWA or EZA?

On 10-year performance, EWA leads with 8.75% vs 8.12% for EZA. On fees, EWA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, EWA has been the lower-risk option at 5.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EWA or EZA?

Over the 10-year period, EWA has performed better with a 8.75% return vs 8.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWA or EZA?

EWA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EZA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EWA or EZA?

EZA has the higher dividend yield at 6.34%, compared with 2.88% for EWA.

What is the main difference between EWA and EZA?

EWA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while EZA is Emerging Markets Equities. EWA tracks MSCI Australia Index, while EZA tracks MSCI South Africa Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWA and 0.59% for EZA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs 0.77), 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.