INTF vs. DFIV

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

INTF (iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF) and DFIV (Dimensional International Value ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. INTF is passively managed, while DFIV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, INTF returned 20.32%/yr vs 23.86%/yr for DFIV. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. INTF charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for DFIV.

Performance

INTF vs. DFIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with INTF having a 11.30% return and DFIV slightly higher at 11.48%.

INTF

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 1.66%
• YTD: 11.30%
• 6M: 11.62%
• 1Y: 29.09%
• 3Y*: 20.32%
• 5Y*: 10.44%
• 10Y*: 10.08%

DFIV

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: -0.05%
• YTD: 11.48%
• 6M: 11.84%
• 1Y: 35.09%
• 3Y*: 23.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

INTF vs. DFIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
INTF iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF	11.30%	35.50%	5.99%	18.25%	-12.31%	-3.08%
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	11.48%	45.36%	7.26%	17.75%	-3.70%	0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between INTF and DFIV is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021	0.94

The correlation between INTF and DFIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

INTF vs. DFIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	INTF	DFIV
Financial Services	26.5%	32.4%
Industrials	19.0%	9.8%
Technology	9.9%	3.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	10.0%
Healthcare	7.9%	4.9%
Basic Materials	6.8%	11.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.0%	4.9%
Energy	5.1%	15.3%
Utilities	3.9%	2.2%
Communication Services	3.2%	4.3%
Real Estate	2.5%	1.7%

Return for Risk

INTF vs. DFIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

INTF

INTF Risk / Return Rank: 61
INTF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
INTF Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
INTF Omega Ratio Rank: 59
INTF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
INTF Martin Ratio Rank: 64

DFIV

DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 78
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 80
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

INTF vs. DFIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). 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.

	INTF	DFIV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.97	2.51	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	3.42	-0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.45	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.86	3.65	-0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.35	14.00	-2.65

INTF vs. DFIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INTF Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the DFIV Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INTF and DFIV, 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

INTF vs. DFIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INTF drawdown since its inception was -40.39%, which is greater than DFIV's maximum drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INTF and DFIV.

Drawdown Indicators

	INTF	DFIV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.39%	-25.42%	-14.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.20%	-9.66%	-0.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.64%	-14.72%	+1.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.26%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.39%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	-1.07%	+0.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.67%	-4.45%	-3.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.57%	2.51%	+0.06%

Volatility

INTF vs. DFIV - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) have volatilities of 4.31% and 4.14%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	INTF	DFIV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.31%	4.14%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.46%	11.44%	+1.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.90%	14.06%	+0.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.20%	16.63%	-0.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.28%	16.63%	+0.65%

INTF vs. DFIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

INTF has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than DFIV's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

INTF vs. DFIV - Dividend Comparison

INTF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.01%, more than DFIV's 2.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	2.55%	2.92%	3.88%	3.93%	3.84%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
INTF iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF	3.01%	2.87%	3.53%	3.59%	2.81%	5.38%	2.06%	3.65%	2.62%	3.26%	1.66%	0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INTF and DFIV in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, INTF and DFIV 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.

Which is riskier, INTF or DFIV?

INTF has higher volatility (4.31%) compared to DFIV (4.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INTF dropped -40.39% vs DFIV's -25.42%.

Which ETF is better, INTF or DFIV?

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 23.86% vs 20.32% for INTF. On fees, DFIV is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, DFIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, INTF or DFIV?

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 23.86% return vs 20.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, INTF or DFIV?

DFIV is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for INTF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INTF or DFIV?

INTF has the higher dividend yield at 3.01%, compared with 2.55% for DFIV.

What is the main difference between INTF and DFIV?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for INTF and 0.27% for DFIV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 1.97), 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.