PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EZA vs. EMF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EZA vs. EMF - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EZA achieves a -5.39% return, which is significantly lower than EMF's 32.81% return. Over the past 10 years, EZA has underperformed EMF with an annualized return of 7.41%, while EMF has yielded a comparatively higher 14.87% annualized return.


EZA

1D
0.40%
1M
-9.22%
YTD
-5.39%
6M
2.60%
1Y
27.60%
3Y*
22.84%
5Y*
8.46%
10Y*
7.41%

EMF

1D
-0.67%
1M
-1.02%
YTD
32.81%
6M
36.23%
1Y
77.86%
3Y*
32.88%
5Y*
10.56%
10Y*
14.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EZA vs. EMF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EZA
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF
-5.39%75.20%7.16%1.51%-5.18%7.91%-5.19%9.83%-25.24%36.03%
EMF
Templeton Emerging Markets Fund
32.81%58.20%6.56%8.84%-21.53%-8.23%24.48%27.20%-14.78%53.55%

Correlation

The correlation between EZA and EMF is 0.51, 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

0.51

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

0.57

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

0.58

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

0.64

The correlation between EZA and EMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

EZA vs. EMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EZA
EZA Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
EZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
EZA Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
EZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
EZA Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank

EMF
EMF Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
EMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMF Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
EMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

EZA vs. EMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) and Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF). 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.


EZAEMFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.48

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.60

-0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.19

4.02

-2.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.19

15.90

-12.70

EZA vs. EMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EZA Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the EMF Sharpe Ratio of 3.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EZA and EMF, 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


EZAEMFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

3.36

-2.48

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

0.52

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.24

0.72

-0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.22

+0.05

Drawdowns

EZA vs. EMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EZA drawdown since its inception was -64.64%, smaller than the maximum EMF drawdown of -76.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZA and EMF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EZAEMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.64%

-76.97%

+12.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.31%

-19.48%

-3.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.31%

-19.48%

-3.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.94%

-45.08%

+10.14%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-62.25%

-47.65%

-14.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-20.23%

-7.72%

-12.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.92%

-28.99%

+12.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.66%

4.91%

+3.75%

Volatility

EZA vs. EMF - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) and Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) have volatilities of 9.66% and 9.80%, 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


EZAEMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.66%

9.80%

-0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.59%

20.78%

+5.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.43%

23.34%

+8.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.77%

20.60%

+8.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.40%

20.63%

+10.77%

EZA vs. EMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EZA has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than EMF's 1.43% expense ratio.


Dividends

EZA vs. EMF - Dividend Comparison

EZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.51%, less than EMF's 7.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMF
Templeton Emerging Markets Fund
7.41%9.73%4.28%6.22%9.89%6.92%3.51%7.36%5.92%12.11%1.62%12.81%
EZA
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF
6.51%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


EZA and EMF have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMF has higher volatility (9.80%) compared to EZA (9.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EZA dropped -64.64% vs EMF's -76.97%.

EMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs 0.88), 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 EZA and EMF

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