MSMR vs. EAOM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MSMR (McElhenny Sheffield Managed Risk ETF) and EAOM (iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. MSMR is actively managed, while EAOM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MSMR returned 18.63%/yr vs 10.47%/yr for EAOM. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MSMR charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EAOM.

Performance

MSMR vs. EAOM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in McElhenny Sheffield Managed Risk ETF (MSMR) and iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF (EAOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSMR achieves a 8.50% return, which is significantly higher than EAOM's 5.08% return.

MSMR

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 4.65%
• YTD: 8.50%
• 6M: 8.41%
• 1Y: 25.41%
• 3Y*: 18.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EAOM

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 2.36%
• YTD: 5.08%
• 6M: 5.24%
• 1Y: 14.66%
• 3Y*: 10.47%
• 5Y*: 4.28%
• 10Y*: —

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

MSMR vs. EAOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MSMR McElhenny Sheffield Managed Risk ETF	8.50%	17.06%	21.58%	18.77%	-11.88%	-1.12%
EAOM iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF	5.08%	12.90%	7.29%	11.83%	-15.48%	-0.02%

Correlation

The correlation between MSMR and EAOM is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2021	0.60

The correlation between MSMR and EAOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

MSMR vs. EAOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MSMR	EAOM
Technology	31.5%	30.2%
Energy	27.4%	3.8%
Communication Services	8.7%	8.3%
Consumer Defensive	8.4%	4.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.1%	9.5%
Healthcare	5.9%	8.6%
Financial Services	3.5%	16.6%
Industrials	2.7%	11.0%
Utilities	2.5%	2.5%
Basic Materials	1.0%	2.8%
Real Estate	0.3%	2.3%

Return for Risk

MSMR vs. EAOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSMR

MSMR Risk / Return Rank: 67
MSMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
MSMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
MSMR Omega Ratio Rank: 65
MSMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
MSMR Martin Ratio Rank: 70

EAOM

EAOM Risk / Return Rank: 68
EAOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
EAOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
EAOM Omega Ratio Rank: 72
EAOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
EAOM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

MSMR vs. EAOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for McElhenny Sheffield Managed Risk ETF (MSMR) and iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF (EAOM). 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.

	MSMR	EAOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	2.29	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	3.31	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.43	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.62	2.85	+0.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.93	12.53	+0.40
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MSMR vs. EAOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSMR Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is comparable to the EAOM Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSMR and EAOM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MSMR	EAOM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	2.29	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	0.76	+0.31

Drawdowns

MSMR vs. EAOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSMR drawdown since its inception was -14.86%, smaller than the maximum EAOM drawdown of -20.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSMR and EAOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSMR	EAOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.86%	-20.73%	+5.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.05%	-5.17%	-1.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.84%	-7.63%	-1.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	-0.45%	+0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.14%	-4.97%	-0.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.97%	1.17%	+0.80%

Volatility

MSMR vs. EAOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for McElhenny Sheffield Managed Risk ETF (MSMR) is 2.16%, while iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF (EAOM) has a volatility of 2.31%. This indicates that MSMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EAOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSMR	EAOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.16%	2.31%	-0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.95%	5.24%	+3.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.94%	6.44%	+5.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.24%	8.07%	+2.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.24%	7.91%	+2.33%

MSMR vs. EAOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSMR has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than EAOM's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSMR vs. EAOM - Dividend Comparison

MSMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.80%, less than EAOM's 2.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EAOM iShares ESG Aware Moderate Allocation ETF	2.78%	2.89%	2.89%	2.70%	1.93%	1.32%	1.02%
MSMR McElhenny Sheffield Managed Risk ETF	1.80%	1.51%	2.26%	0.81%	0.65%	0.07%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSMR and EAOM in my portfolio?

MSMR and EAOM have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSMR or EAOM?

EAOM has higher volatility (2.31%) compared to MSMR (2.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSMR dropped -14.86% vs EAOM's -20.73%.

Which ETF is better, MSMR or EAOM?

On 3-year performance, MSMR leads with 18.63% vs 10.47% for EAOM. On fees, EAOM is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, MSMR has been the lower-risk option at 2.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSMR or EAOM?

Over the 3-year period, MSMR has performed better with a 18.63% return vs 10.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSMR or EAOM?

EAOM is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for MSMR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MSMR or EAOM?

EAOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.78%, compared with 1.80% for MSMR.

What is the main difference between MSMR and EAOM?

They also come from different issuers: McElhenny Sheffield and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for MSMR and 0.18% for EAOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.14), 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.