PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IEFA vs. GNR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IEFA vs. GNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IEFA achieves a 7.49% return, which is significantly lower than GNR's 15.95% return. Over the past 10 years, IEFA has underperformed GNR with an annualized return of 9.37%, while GNR has yielded a comparatively higher 10.53% annualized return.


IEFA

1D
0.63%
1M
-1.17%
YTD
7.49%
6M
10.04%
1Y
19.61%
3Y*
16.13%
5Y*
7.82%
10Y*
9.37%

GNR

1D
0.18%
1M
-2.80%
YTD
15.95%
6M
20.08%
1Y
37.42%
3Y*
13.57%
5Y*
9.11%
10Y*
10.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IEFA vs. GNR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IEFA
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF
7.49%32.08%3.26%17.95%-15.24%11.63%8.18%22.64%-14.14%26.57%
GNR
SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF
15.95%28.68%-8.27%2.95%10.20%24.73%-0.03%16.49%-13.19%22.64%

Correlation

The correlation between IEFA and GNR is 0.55, 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

0.55

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

0.65

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

0.69

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

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2012

0.76

Over the past year, the correlation between IEFA and GNR has dropped to 0.55 - well below their long-term average of 0.76, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IEFA vs. GNR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IEFA
GNR

Financial Services

22.5%
0.0%

Industrials

20.1%
0.2%

Technology

10.8%

-

Healthcare

9.5%
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.0%
6.3%

Basic Materials

7.0%
50.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.6%
4.6%

Communication Services

4.4%

-

Energy

3.8%
37.6%

Utilities

3.6%
0.0%

Real Estate

3.0%
0.8%

Financial Services

IEFA
22.5%
GNR
0.0%

Industrials

IEFA
20.1%
GNR
0.2%

Technology

IEFA
10.8%
GNR

-

Healthcare

IEFA
9.5%
GNR
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

IEFA
8.0%
GNR
6.3%

Basic Materials

IEFA
7.0%
GNR
50.3%

Consumer Defensive

IEFA
6.6%
GNR
4.6%

Communication Services

IEFA
4.4%
GNR

-

Energy

IEFA
3.8%
GNR
37.6%

Utilities

IEFA
3.6%
GNR
0.0%

Real Estate

IEFA
3.0%
GNR
0.8%

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

IEFA vs. GNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEFA
IEFA Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
IEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
IEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

GNR
GNR Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

IEFA vs. GNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). 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.


IEFAGNRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.98

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.39

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.71

4.72

-3.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.52

18.00

-11.49

IEFA vs. GNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is lower than the GNR Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEFA and GNR, 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


IEFAGNRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.30

2.23

-0.93

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.45

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

0.48

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.25

+0.25

Drawdowns

IEFA vs. GNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEFA drawdown since its inception was -34.78%, smaller than the maximum GNR drawdown of -51.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEFA and GNR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IEFAGNRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.78%

-51.37%

+16.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.50%

-7.97%

-3.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.76%

-21.15%

+7.39%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.41%

-25.66%

-4.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.78%

-48.59%

+13.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.44%

-5.04%

+2.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.69%

-14.94%

+8.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.02%

2.08%

+0.94%

Volatility

IEFA vs. GNR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) is 4.54%, while SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) has a volatility of 5.49%. This indicates that IEFA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IEFAGNRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.54%

5.49%

-0.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.74%

13.73%

-0.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.22%

16.88%

-1.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.55%

20.30%

-3.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.32%

21.90%

-4.58%

IEFA vs. GNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEFA has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than GNR's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

IEFA vs. GNR - Dividend Comparison

IEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.30%, more than GNR's 2.56% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GNR
SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF
2.56%2.76%4.73%3.37%4.37%3.44%2.78%3.84%3.51%2.40%2.06%4.59%
IEFA
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF
3.30%3.55%3.47%3.20%2.70%3.32%1.90%3.18%3.46%2.57%2.96%2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions


IEFA and GNR have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GNR has higher volatility (5.49%) compared to IEFA (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEFA dropped -34.78% vs GNR's -51.37%.

On 10-year performance, GNR leads with 10.53% vs 9.37% for IEFA. On fees, IEFA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, IEFA has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GNR has performed better with a 10.53% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IEFA is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.

IEFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.30%, compared with 2.56% for GNR.

IEFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while GNR is Commodity Producers Equities. IEFA tracks MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net), while GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IEFA and 0.40% for GNR.

GNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.30), 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 IEFA and GNR

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