PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EWH vs. BRF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EWH vs. BRF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EWH (iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF) and BRF (VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWH is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Hong Kong Index, while BRF is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWH returned 4.69%/yr vs 5.57%/yr for BRF. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EWH charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for BRF.

Performance

EWH vs. BRF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWH achieves a 1.00% return, which is significantly lower than BRF's 1.35% return. Over the past 10 years, EWH has underperformed BRF with an annualized return of 4.69%, while BRF has yielded a comparatively higher 5.57% annualized return.

EWH

1D
-0.98%
1M
-8.64%
YTD
1.00%
6M
-1.14%
1Y
14.36%
3Y*
8.16%
5Y*
-1.00%
10Y*
4.69%

BRF

1D
-0.30%
1M
-7.29%
YTD
1.35%
6M
2.21%
1Y
14.35%
3Y*
0.89%
5Y*
-4.70%
10Y*
5.57%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EWH vs. BRF - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		1.00%34.50%0.00%-13.87%-6.81%-3.49%4.17%10.74%-8.76%36.46%
BRF
VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF		1.35%54.17%-35.02%37.21%-14.38%-20.40%-21.07%40.66%-12.07%54.63%

Correlation

The correlation between EWH and BRF is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.36

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.33

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2009

0.44

The correlation between EWH and BRF shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (5 years) to 0.44 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EWH vs. BRF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EWH
BRF

Financial Services

43.9%
9.0%

Industrials

18.3%
13.2%

Real Estate

18.0%
14.6%

Utilities

11.6%
9.5%

Consumer Cyclical

3.9%
13.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
9.8%

Communication Services

1.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

13.4%

Energy

-

5.4%

Healthcare

-

5.7%

Technology

-

4.4%

Financial Services

EWH
43.9%
BRF
9.0%

Industrials

EWH
18.3%
BRF
13.2%

Real Estate

EWH
18.0%
BRF
14.6%

Utilities

EWH
11.6%
BRF
9.5%

Consumer Cyclical

EWH
3.9%
BRF
13.9%

Consumer Defensive

EWH
2.6%
BRF
9.8%

Communication Services

EWH
1.7%
BRF

-

Basic Materials

EWH

-

BRF
13.4%

Energy

EWH

-

BRF
5.4%

Healthcare

EWH

-

BRF
5.7%

Technology

EWH

-

BRF
4.4%

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 Hong Kong ETF

VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF

Often compared with EWH:
EWH vs. MCHIEWH vs. FXIEWH vs. EWSEWH vs. EWYEWH vs. EWTEWH vs. EWJEWH vs. EPP
Often compared with BRF:
BRF vs. EWZBRF vs. EWZSBRF vs. FLNBRF vs. KSABRF vs. TMFCBRF vs. GDXBRF vs. FLBR

Return for Risk

EWH vs. BRF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EWH
EWH Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
EWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWH Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
EWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWH Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
BRF
BRF Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
BRF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BRF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
BRF Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
BRF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
BRF Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
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.

EWH vs. BRF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF). 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.

EWHBRFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.86
0.50

+0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.30
0.87

+0.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.11

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.12

0.75

+0.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.61

2.09

+1.52

EWH vs. BRF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWH Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is higher than the BRF Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWH and BRF, 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

EWH vs. BRF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWH drawdown since its inception was -66.44%, smaller than the maximum BRF drawdown of -82.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWH and BRF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EWHBRFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.44%

-82.26%

+15.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.91%

-19.29%

+6.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.93%

-37.81%

+12.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-41.28%

-49.24%

+7.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.71%

-60.43%

+17.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.58%

-50.59%

+38.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.46%

-45.74%

+26.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.99%

6.89%

-2.90%

Volatility

EWH vs. BRF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) is 5.32%, while VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF (BRF) has a volatility of 8.03%. This indicates that EWH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BRF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EWHBRFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.32%

8.03%

-2.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.49%

23.43%

-10.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.78%

28.85%

-12.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.11%

31.72%

-11.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.54%

33.88%

-14.34%

EWH vs. BRF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWH has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BRF's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWH vs. BRF - Dividend Comparison

EWH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.90%, less than BRF's 5.47% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BRF
VanEck Vectors Brazil Small-Cap ETF		5.47%5.54%4.08%5.02%4.13%2.96%1.66%2.54%2.89%4.53%4.25%3.84%
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		4.90%5.20%4.17%4.28%2.91%2.78%2.56%2.71%2.93%4.35%3.08%2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

EWH and BRF have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BRF has higher volatility (8.03%) compared to EWH (5.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWH dropped -66.44% vs BRF's -82.26%.

On 10-year performance, BRF leads with 5.57% vs 4.69% for EWH. On fees, EWH is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, EWH has been the lower-risk option at 5.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, BRF has performed better with a 5.57% return vs 4.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EWH is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BRF.

BRF has the higher dividend yield at 5.47%, compared with 4.90% for EWH.

EWH is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while BRF is Latin America Equities. EWH tracks MSCI Hong Kong Index, while BRF tracks MVIS Brazil Small-Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EWH and 0.60% for BRF.

EWH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.86 vs 0.50), 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 EWH and BRF

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