MUB vs. EFA
MUB (iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF) and EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MUB is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while EFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MUB returned 1.92%/yr vs 9.84%/yr for EFA. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. MUB charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for EFA.
Performance
MUB vs. EFA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MUB achieves a 1.28% return, which is significantly lower than EFA's 9.36% return. Over the past 10 years, MUB has underperformed EFA with an annualized return of 1.92%, while EFA has yielded a comparatively higher 9.84% annualized return.
MUB
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.63%
- YTD
- 1.28%
- 6M
- 1.80%
- 1Y
- 6.40%
- 3Y*
- 3.35%
- 5Y*
- 0.80%
- 10Y*
- 1.92%
EFA
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- 1.51%
- YTD
- 9.36%
- 6M
- 10.80%
- 1Y
- 21.90%
- 3Y*
- 16.14%
- 5Y*
- 8.36%
- 10Y*
- 9.84%
MUB vs. EFA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF | 1.28% | 3.78% | 1.26% | 5.56% | -7.34% | 1.02% | 5.12% | 7.06% | 0.93% | 4.72% |
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 MUB and EFA is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2007 | -0.01 |
The correlation between MUB and EFA shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (all time) to 0.37 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MUB vs. EFA — Risk / Return Rank
MUB
EFA
MUB vs. EFA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) 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.
| MUB | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.44 | 1.24 | +0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.22 | 1.79 | +0.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.77 | 6.67 | +1.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MUB vs. EFA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MUB drawdown since its inception was -13.68%, smaller than the maximum EFA drawdown of -61.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MUB and EFA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MUB | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.68% | -61.04% | +47.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.79% | -11.42% | +8.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.34% | -14.05% | +8.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.88% | -29.53% | +17.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.68% | -34.19% | +20.51% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.66% | -0.61% | -0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -11.92% | +9.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.80% | 3.07% | -2.27% |
Volatility
MUB vs. EFA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF (MUB) is 1.01%, while iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that MUB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MUB | EFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.01% | 5.50% | -4.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.25% | 13.19% | -10.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.90% | 15.64% | -12.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.06% | 16.58% | -12.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.92% | 17.27% | -12.35% |
MUB vs. EFA - Expense Ratio Comparison
MUB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than EFA's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
MUB vs. EFA - Dividend Comparison
MUB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than EFA's 3.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
MUB iShares National AMT-Free Muni Bond ETF | 3.17% | 3.14% | 3.01% | 2.65% | 2.11% | 1.81% | 2.11% | 2.42% | 2.46% | 2.26% | 2.21% | 2.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MUB and EFA have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EFA has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to MUB (1.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MUB dropped -13.68% vs EFA's -61.04%.
On 10-year performance, EFA leads with 9.84% vs 1.92% for MUB. On fees, MUB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, MUB has been the lower-risk option at 1.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EFA has performed better with a 9.84% return vs 1.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MUB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for EFA.
MUB has the higher dividend yield at 3.17%, compared with 3.09% for EFA.
MUB is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while EFA is Foreign Large Cap Equities. MUB tracks S&P National AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index, while EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.07% for MUB and 0.32% for EFA.
MUB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.31), 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.
Find the right allocation for MUB 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