PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ITB vs. EFA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ITB vs. EFA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ITB achieves a 0.87% return, which is significantly lower than EFA's 9.36% return. Over the past 10 years, ITB has outperformed EFA with an annualized return of 14.45%, while EFA has yielded a comparatively lower 9.84% annualized return.


ITB

1D
-0.81%
1M
8.97%
YTD
0.87%
6M
-5.10%
1Y
5.46%
3Y*
7.35%
5Y*
8.18%
10Y*
14.45%

EFA

1D
0.28%
1M
1.15%
YTD
9.36%
6M
10.80%
1Y
20.34%
3Y*
16.14%
5Y*
8.36%
10Y*
9.84%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ITB vs. EFA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ITB
iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF
0.87%-5.26%2.06%68.91%-26.26%49.25%26.42%48.70%-30.92%59.65%
EFA
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF
9.36%31.55%3.49%18.36%-14.39%11.45%7.60%22.04%-13.82%25.07%

Correlation

The correlation between ITB and EFA is 0.57, 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

0.57

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

0.57

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

0.60

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2006

0.57

The correlation between ITB and EFA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

ITB vs. EFA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ITB
EFA

Consumer Cyclical

71.8%
7.6%

Industrials

19.1%
19.9%

Basic Materials

8.6%
5.9%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.9%

Communication Services

-

4.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.7%

Energy

-

4.0%

Financial Services

-

24.6%

Healthcare

-

10.6%

Technology

-

10.4%

Utilities

-

4.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ITB
71.8%
EFA
7.6%

Industrials

ITB
19.1%
EFA
19.9%

Basic Materials

ITB
8.6%
EFA
5.9%

Real Estate

ITB
0.5%
EFA
1.9%

Communication Services

ITB

-

EFA
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

ITB

-

EFA
6.7%

Energy

ITB

-

EFA
4.0%

Financial Services

ITB

-

EFA
24.6%

Healthcare

ITB

-

EFA
10.6%

Technology

ITB

-

EFA
10.4%

Utilities

ITB

-

EFA
4.0%

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

ITB vs. EFA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ITB
ITB Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
ITB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ITB Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
ITB Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
ITB Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
ITB Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
Martin Ratio Rank

EFA
EFA Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
EFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFA Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
EFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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.

ITB vs. EFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) and iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA). 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.


ITBEFADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.24

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.21

1.79

-1.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.41

6.67

-6.26

ITB vs. EFA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ITB Sharpe Ratio is 0.18, which is lower than the EFA Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ITB and EFA, 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

ITB vs. EFA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ITB drawdown since its inception was -86.53%, which is greater than EFA's maximum drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITB and EFA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ITBEFADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.53%

-61.04%

-25.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.04%

-11.42%

-14.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.35%

-14.05%

-19.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.55%

-29.53%

-11.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.10%

-34.19%

-17.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-23.53%

-0.61%

-22.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-37.08%

-11.92%

-25.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.45%

3.07%

+10.38%

Volatility

ITB vs. EFA - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) has a higher volatility of 9.26% compared to iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) at 5.50%. This indicates that ITB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ITBEFADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.26%

5.50%

+3.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.89%

13.19%

+7.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.90%

15.64%

+14.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.29%

16.58%

+12.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.05%

17.27%

+12.78%

ITB vs. EFA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ITB has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than EFA's 0.32% expense ratio.


Dividends

ITB vs. EFA - Dividend Comparison

ITB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, less than EFA's 3.09% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EFA
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF
3.09%3.38%3.24%2.98%2.69%3.33%2.13%3.10%3.39%2.57%3.07%2.76%
ITB
iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF
1.17%1.67%0.46%0.48%0.86%0.37%0.46%0.50%0.63%0.28%0.43%0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions


ITB and EFA have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ITB has higher volatility (9.26%) compared to EFA (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITB dropped -86.53% vs EFA's -61.04%.

On 10-year performance, ITB leads with 14.45% vs 9.84% for EFA. On fees, EFA is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, EFA has been the lower-risk option at 5.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ITB has performed better with a 14.45% return vs 9.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EFA is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for ITB.

EFA has the higher dividend yield at 3.09%, compared with 1.17% for ITB.

ITB is categorized as Building & Construction, while EFA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. ITB tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index, while EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.42% for ITB and 0.32% for EFA.

EFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs 0.18), 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 ITB and EFA

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