EZA vs. EQLT

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

EZA (iShares MSCI South Africa ETF) and EQLT (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - EZA tracks the MSCI South Africa Index while EQLT tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EZA returned 25.47% vs 41.15% for EQLT. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EZA charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EQLT.

Performance

EZA vs. EQLT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EZA achieves a -7.37% return, which is significantly lower than EQLT's 22.08% return.

EZA

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: -6.24%
• 6M: -12.44%
• YTD: -7.37%
• 1Y: 25.47%
• 3Y*: 19.62%
• 5Y*: 10.33%
• 10Y*: 6.24%

EQLT

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -7.34%
• 6M: 16.75%
• YTD: 22.08%
• 1Y: 41.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EZA vs. EQLT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EZA iShares MSCI South Africa ETF	-7.37%	75.20%	-4.68%
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	22.08%	33.93%	-1.29%

Correlation

The correlation between EZA and EQLT is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2024	0.70

The correlation between EZA and EQLT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

EZA vs. EQLT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EZA	EQLT
Basic Materials	39.0%	6.8%
Financial Services	33.5%	17.4%
Consumer Cyclical	14.3%	10.1%
Communication Services	6.5%	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	3.2%
Real Estate	1.6%	1.2%
Industrials	1.5%	10.8%
Healthcare	1.1%	2.6%
Energy	-	3.7%
Technology	-	36.1%
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

EZA vs. EQLT — Risk / Return Rank

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

EZA

EZA Risk / Return Rank: 26
EZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
EZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
EZA Omega Ratio Rank: 27
EZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
EZA Martin Ratio Rank: 24

EQLT

EQLT Risk / Return Rank: 75
EQLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
EQLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
EQLT Omega Ratio Rank: 71
EQLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EQLT Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. EQLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	EZA	EQLT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.79	1.79	-1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.23	2.38	-1.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.32	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.10	3.45	-2.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.38	11.61	-9.23

EZA vs. EQLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EZA Sharpe Ratio is 0.79, which is lower than the EQLT Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EZA and EQLT, 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

EZA vs. EQLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EZA drawdown since its inception was -64.64%, which is greater than EQLT's maximum drawdown of -17.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZA and EQLT.

Drawdown Indicators

	EZA	EQLT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.64%	-17.38%	-47.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.31%	-12.00%	-11.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.31%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-62.25%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.90%	-8.94%	-12.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.93%	-3.70%	-13.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.74%	3.55%	+7.19%

Volatility

EZA vs. EQLT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) is 6.51%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT) has a volatility of 6.93%. This indicates that EZA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EQLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EZA	EQLT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.51%	6.93%	-0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.04%	21.04%	+6.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.21%	23.13%	+9.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.82%	21.27%	+7.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.13%	21.27%	+9.86%

EZA vs. EQLT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EZA has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than EQLT's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EZA vs. EQLT - Dividend Comparison

EZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.09%, more than EQLT's 2.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	2.87%	3.10%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EZA iShares MSCI South Africa ETF	8.09%	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 EZA and EQLT in my portfolio?

EZA and EQLT have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EZA or EQLT?

EQLT has higher volatility (6.93%) compared to EZA (6.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EZA dropped -64.64% vs EQLT's -17.38%.

Which ETF is better, EZA or EQLT?

On 1-year performance, EQLT leads with 41.15% vs 25.47% for EZA. On fees, EQLT is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EZA has been the lower-risk option at 6.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EZA or EQLT?

Over the 1-year period, EQLT has performed better with a 41.15% return vs 25.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EZA or EQLT?

EQLT is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EZA.

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

EZA has the higher dividend yield at 8.09%, compared with 2.87% for EQLT.

What is the main difference between EZA and EQLT?

EZA tracks MSCI South Africa Index, while EQLT tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for EZA and 0.35% for EQLT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQLT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.79), 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.