MTRA vs. EFG

Last updated Jul 11, 2026

MTRA (Invesco International Growth Focus ETF) and EFG (iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. Over the past year, MTRA returned 7.27% vs 13.59% for EFG. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MTRA charges 0.54%/yr vs 0.34%/yr for EFG.

Performance

MTRA vs. EFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco International Growth Focus ETF (MTRA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MTRA achieves a 2.54% return, which is significantly lower than EFG's 8.53% return.

MTRA

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 1.79%
• 6M: -1.42%
• YTD: 2.54%
• 1Y: 7.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EFG

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 0.11%
• 6M: 3.81%
• YTD: 8.53%
• 1Y: 13.59%
• 3Y*: 11.42%
• 5Y*: 4.25%
• 10Y*: 8.04%

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

MTRA vs. EFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MTRA Invesco International Growth Focus ETF	2.54%	4.16%
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF	8.53%	4.84%

Correlation

The correlation between MTRA and EFG is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2025	0.92

The correlation between MTRA and EFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MTRA vs. EFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

MTRA

MTRA Risk / Return Rank: 14
MTRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
MTRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
MTRA Omega Ratio Rank: 14
MTRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
MTRA Martin Ratio Rank: 16

EFG

EFG Risk / Return Rank: 25
EFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
EFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
EFG Omega Ratio Rank: 22
EFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
EFG Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

MTRA vs. EFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco International Growth Focus ETF (MTRA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG). 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.

	MTRA	EFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.31	0.68	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.56	1.07	-0.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.13	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.37	0.97	-0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.10	3.54	-2.45

MTRA vs. EFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MTRA Sharpe Ratio is 0.31, which is lower than the EFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MTRA and EFG, 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

MTRA vs. EFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MTRA drawdown since its inception was -15.77%, smaller than the maximum EFG drawdown of -58.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MTRA and EFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	MTRA	EFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.77%	-58.40%	+42.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.77%	-12.78%	-2.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.87%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.78%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.00%	-2.20%	-0.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.75%	-12.10%	+8.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.27%	3.50%	+1.77%

Volatility

MTRA vs. EFG - Volatility Comparison

Invesco International Growth Focus ETF (MTRA) has a higher volatility of 7.47% compared to iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) at 6.86%. This indicates that MTRA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MTRA	EFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.47%	6.86%	+0.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.37%	15.92%	+0.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.72%	18.35%	+0.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.43%	18.37%	+0.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.43%	17.57%	+0.86%

MTRA vs. EFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MTRA has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is higher than EFG's 0.34% expense ratio.

Dividends

MTRA vs. EFG - Dividend Comparison

MTRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, less than EFG's 2.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFG iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF	2.27%	2.53%	1.64%	1.63%	1.27%	1.54%	0.85%	1.69%	1.98%	1.56%	2.20%	1.75%
MTRA Invesco International Growth Focus ETF	0.67%	0.69%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MTRA and EFG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, MTRA and EFG 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, MTRA or EFG?

MTRA has higher volatility (7.47%) compared to EFG (6.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MTRA dropped -15.77% vs EFG's -58.40%.

Which ETF is better, MTRA or EFG?

On 1-year performance, EFG leads with 13.59% vs 7.27% for MTRA. On fees, EFG is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, EFG has been the lower-risk option at 6.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MTRA or EFG?

Over the 1-year period, EFG has performed better with a 13.59% return vs 7.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MTRA or EFG?

EFG is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for MTRA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MTRA or EFG?

EFG has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 0.67% for MTRA.

What is the main difference between MTRA and EFG?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for MTRA and 0.34% for EFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.68 vs 0.31), 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.