IEFA vs. GSIE
IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) and GSIE (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - IEFA tracks the MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net) while GSIE tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IEFA returned 9.38%/yr vs 9.39%/yr for GSIE. Their 0.98 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. IEFA charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for GSIE.
Performance
IEFA vs. GSIE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IEFA achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly higher than GSIE's 8.75% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IEFA having a 9.38% annualized return and GSIE not far ahead at 9.39%.
IEFA
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- 6M
- 4.92%
- YTD
- 9.45%
- 1Y
- 17.75%
- 3Y*
- 15.52%
- 5Y*
- 8.55%
- 10Y*
- 9.38%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.38%
GSIE
- 1D
- 0.46%
- 1M
- 1.03%
- 6M
- 5.39%
- YTD
- 8.75%
- 1Y
- 17.13%
- 3Y*
- 15.96%
- 5Y*
- 8.63%
- 10Y*
- 9.39%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.80%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $16.98M | $19.56M | $19.60M | |
| $895.79M | $960.37M | $950.39M |
IEFA vs. GSIE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | 9.45% | 32.08% | 3.26% | 17.95% | -15.24% | 11.63% | 8.18% | 22.64% | -14.14% | 26.57% |
GSIE Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF | 8.75% | 32.53% | 5.23% | 16.99% | -15.86% | 13.27% | 7.45% | 22.83% | -13.40% | 26.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between IEFA and GSIE is 0.99 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.99 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.99 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2015 | 0.98 |
The correlation between IEFA and GSIE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.
IEFA vs. GSIE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IEFA
GSIE
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Utilities
Communication Services
Real Estate
Financial Services
IEFA
GSIE
Industrials
IEFA
GSIE
Technology
IEFA
GSIE
Healthcare
IEFA
GSIE
Consumer Cyclical
IEFA
GSIE
Consumer Defensive
IEFA
GSIE
Basic Materials
IEFA
GSIE
Energy
IEFA
GSIE
Utilities
IEFA
GSIE
Communication Services
IEFA
GSIE
Real Estate
IEFA
GSIE
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. GSIE — Risk / Return Rank
IEFA
GSIE
IEFA vs. GSIE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE). 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.
| IEFA | GSIE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | 1.21 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.54 | 1.58 | -0.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.85 | 5.99 | -0.14 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IEFA vs. GSIE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IEFA drawdown since its inception was -34.78%, roughly equal to the maximum GSIE drawdown of -34.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEFA and GSIE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IEFA | GSIE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.78% | -34.63% | -0.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.50% | -10.76% | -0.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.76% | -13.07% | -0.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.41% | -29.97% | -0.44% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.78% | -34.63% | -0.15% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.00% | -1.06% | -0.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.63% | -5.99% | -0.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.02% | 2.84% | +0.18% |
Volatility
IEFA vs. GSIE - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) has a higher volatility of 4.00% compared to Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF (GSIE) at 3.56%. This indicates that IEFA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSIE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IEFA | GSIE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.00% | 3.56% | +0.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.48% | 12.39% | +1.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.55% | 14.49% | +1.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.59% | 16.08% | +0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.02% | 16.49% | +0.53% |
IEFA vs. GSIE - Expense Ratio Comparison
IEFA has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than GSIE's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IEFA vs. GSIE - Dividend Comparison
IEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.41%, more than GSIE's 2.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSIE Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity ETF | 2.56% | 2.65% | 3.11% | 2.87% | 3.01% | 2.40% | 1.60% | 2.80% | 2.68% | 2.31% | 2.15% | 0.13% |
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | 3.41% | 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
With a correlation of 0.99, IEFA and GSIE move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
IEFA has higher volatility (4.00%) compared to GSIE (3.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEFA dropped -34.78% vs GSIE's -34.63%.
On 10-year performance, GSIE leads with 9.39% vs 9.38% for IEFA. On fees, IEFA is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, GSIE has been the lower-risk option at 3.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GSIE has performed better with a 9.39% return vs 9.38%. 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 0.25% for GSIE.
IEFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.41%, compared with 2.56% for GSIE.
IEFA tracks MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net), while GSIE tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta International Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IEFA and 0.25% for GSIE.
GSIE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.17 vs 1.14), 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.
Find the right allocation for IEFA and GSIE
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