PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EZA vs. EQQQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EZA vs. EQQQ.L

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

EZA (iShares MSCI South Africa ETF) and EQQQ.L (Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EZA is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI South Africa Index, while EQQQ.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EZA returned 8.12%/yr vs 21.60%/yr for EQQQ.L. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EZA charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for EQQQ.L.

Performance

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) and Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EZA is traded in USD, while EQQQ.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the EQQQ.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EZA achieves a -2.81% return, which is significantly lower than EQQQ.L's 16.65% return. Over the past 10 years, EZA has underperformed EQQQ.L with an annualized return of 8.12%, while EQQQ.L has yielded a comparatively higher 21.60% annualized return.

EZA

1D
0.89%
1M
-0.73%
YTD
-2.81%
6M
2.77%
1Y
33.90%
3Y*
23.45%
5Y*
9.50%
10Y*
8.12%

EQQQ.L

1D
2.37%
1M
0.58%
YTD
16.65%
6M
17.67%
1Y
36.70%
3Y*
26.14%
5Y*
16.66%
10Y*
21.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
EQQQ.L
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF		16.65%19.96%26.41%55.59%-33.50%28.41%47.71%39.05%-1.28%31.55%

Correlation

The correlation between EZA and EQQQ.L is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.43

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

0.34

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

0.36

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

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2007

0.36

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EZA
EQQQ.L

Basic Materials

39.0%
1.1%

Financial Services

33.5%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

14.3%
10.9%

Communication Services

6.5%
13.7%

Consumer Defensive

2.5%
6.8%

Real Estate

1.6%
0.0%

Industrials

1.5%
2.9%

Healthcare

1.1%
3.8%

Energy

-

0.5%

Technology

-

59.0%

Utilities

-

1.2%

Basic Materials

EZA
39.0%
EQQQ.L
1.1%

Financial Services

EZA
33.5%
EQQQ.L
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

EZA
14.3%
EQQQ.L
10.9%

Communication Services

EZA
6.5%
EQQQ.L
13.7%

Consumer Defensive

EZA
2.5%
EQQQ.L
6.8%

Real Estate

EZA
1.6%
EQQQ.L
0.0%

Industrials

EZA
1.5%
EQQQ.L
2.9%

Healthcare

EZA
1.1%
EQQQ.L
3.8%

Energy

EZA

-

EQQQ.L
0.5%

Technology

EZA

-

EQQQ.L
59.0%

Utilities

EZA

-

EQQQ.L
1.2%

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 South Africa ETF

Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with EZA:
EZA vs. AFKEZA vs. KSAEZA vs. SPYEZA vs. PAF.LEZA vs. VTIEZA vs. SCHDEZA vs. INDA
Often compared with EQQQ.L:
EQQQ.L vs. QQQEQQQ.L vs. QQQMEQQQ.L vs. EQGB.LEQQQ.L vs. CNX1.LEQQQ.L vs. EQQU.LEQQQ.L vs. CSPX.LEQQQ.L vs. XNAQ.L

Return for Risk

EZA vs. EQQQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EZA
EZA Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
EZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
EZA Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
EZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
EZA Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L
EQQQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
EQQQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
EQQQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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. EQQQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) and Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQQ.L). 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.

EZAEQQQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.95
2.21

-1.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.41
3.03

-1.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.38

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.31

3.19

-1.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.41

11.43

-8.02

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EZA Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the EQQQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EZA and EQQQ.L, 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

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EZA drawdown since its inception was -64.64%, smaller than the maximum EQQQ.L drawdown of -73.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZA and EQQQ.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EZAEQQQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-64.64%

-73.86%

+9.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.31%

-11.03%

-12.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.31%

-22.63%

-0.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.94%

-35.27%

+0.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-62.25%

-35.27%

-26.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-18.05%

-3.17%

-14.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.92%

-17.15%

+0.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.93%

3.09%

+5.84%

Volatility

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) has a higher volatility of 11.34% compared to Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF (EQQQ.L) at 5.75%. This indicates that EZA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQQQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EZAEQQQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.34%

5.75%

+5.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

27.03%

12.04%

+14.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.92%

15.93%

+15.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.86%

20.59%

+8.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.43%

19.90%

+11.53%

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EZA has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than EQQQ.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

EZA vs. EQQQ.L - Dividend Comparison

EZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.34%, more than EQQQ.L's 0.23% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EQQQ.L
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF		0.23%0.29%0.38%0.39%0.56%0.25%0.41%0.56%0.63%0.67%0.77%0.72%
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

EZA and EQQQ.L have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EQQQ.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EQQQ.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EZA.

EZA is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EQQQ.L is Nasdaq-100. EZA tracks MSCI South Africa Index, while EQQQ.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for EZA and 0.30% for EQQQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EZA and EQQQ.L

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