NOBL vs. EFAS

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) and EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) are both Dividend funds - NOBL tracks the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index while EFAS tracks the MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NOBL returned 6.45%/yr vs 13.40%/yr for EFAS. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NOBL charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EFAS.

Performance

NOBL vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOBL achieves a 9.33% return, which is significantly lower than EFAS's 15.86% return.

NOBL

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: 1.76%
• 6M: 5.17%
• YTD: 9.33%
• 1Y: 12.04%
• 3Y*: 8.22%
• 5Y*: 6.45%
• 10Y*: 9.56%

EFAS

• 1D: 0.94%
• 1M: 0.35%
• 6M: 14.68%
• YTD: 15.86%
• 1Y: 27.92%
• 3Y*: 23.73%
• 5Y*: 13.40%
• 10Y*: —

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

NOBL vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	9.33%	6.84%	6.72%	8.09%	-6.52%	25.46%	8.35%	27.39%	-3.26%	21.02%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	15.86%	46.83%	3.07%	14.65%	-8.00%	12.75%	-5.42%	14.60%	-11.60%	22.76%

Correlation

The correlation between NOBL and EFAS is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2016	0.55

The correlation between NOBL and EFAS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

NOBL vs. EFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NOBL	EFAS
Consumer Defensive	23.6%	8.1%
Industrials	20.2%	10.4%
Financial Services	12.8%	31.0%
Healthcare	10.2%	0.1%
Basic Materials	10.2%	1.7%
Utilities	5.7%	13.7%
Consumer Cyclical	5.3%	1.9%
Technology	4.6%	0.1%
Real Estate	4.6%	11.4%
Energy	2.9%	13.1%
Communication Services	-	8.6%

Return for Risk

NOBL vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOBL

NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 33
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 31
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 30

EFAS

EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 90
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

NOBL vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). 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.

	NOBL	EFAS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.04	2.56	-1.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	3.60	-2.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.45	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.33	5.29	-3.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.36	12.93	-9.57

NOBL vs. EFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOBL Sharpe Ratio is 1.04, which is lower than the EFAS Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOBL and EFAS, 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

NOBL vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOBL drawdown since its inception was -35.43%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOBL and EFAS.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOBL	EFAS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.43%	-44.38%	+8.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.11%	-5.30%	-3.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.36%	-11.84%	-3.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.92%	-28.81%	+10.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.43%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-0.52%	-1.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.47%	-7.02%	+3.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.59%	2.17%	+1.42%

Volatility

NOBL vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison

ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) has a higher volatility of 4.11% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 2.76%. This indicates that NOBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NOBL	EFAS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.11%	2.76%	+1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.54%	8.74%	-0.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.67%	10.95%	+0.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.43%	15.57%	-1.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.60%	18.27%	-1.67%

NOBL vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOBL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than EFAS's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOBL vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

NOBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%, less than EFAS's 4.71% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	4.71%	4.83%	6.76%	6.33%	7.28%	5.19%	4.34%	5.75%	6.63%	6.15%	0.21%	0.00%
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	2.07%	2.14%	2.05%	2.09%	1.94%	1.89%	2.14%	1.89%	2.37%	1.74%	2.13%	2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOBL and EFAS in my portfolio?

NOBL and EFAS have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NOBL or EFAS?

NOBL has higher volatility (4.11%) compared to EFAS (2.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOBL dropped -35.43% vs EFAS's -44.38%.

Which ETF is better, NOBL or EFAS?

On 5-year performance, EFAS leads with 13.40% vs 6.45% for NOBL. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 2.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NOBL or EFAS?

Over the 5-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 13.40% return vs 6.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NOBL or EFAS?

NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EFAS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NOBL or EFAS?

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.71%, compared with 2.07% for NOBL.

What is the main difference between NOBL and EFAS?

NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index, while EFAS tracks MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for NOBL and 0.55% for EFAS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 1.04), 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.