PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
OSEA vs. EFAS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

OSEA vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor International Compounders ETF (OSEA) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OSEA achieves a 0.69% return, which is significantly lower than EFAS's 20.56% return.


OSEA

1D
-0.44%
1M
0.49%
6M
0.27%
YTD
0.69%
1Y
9.18%
3Y*
7.19%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
12.41%

EFAS

1D
-0.90%
1M
6.31%
6M
14.73%
YTD
20.56%
1Y
32.01%
3Y*
25.41%
5Y*
14.43%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
10.80%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$411.25K$354.75K$345.09K
$1.60M$1.39M$1.57M

OSEA vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
OSEA
Harbor International Compounders ETF
0.69%18.49%-0.73%20.88%10.14%
EFAS
Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF
20.56%46.83%3.07%14.65%8.94%

Correlation

The correlation between OSEA and EFAS is 0.47, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.47

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2022

0.59

The correlation between OSEA and EFAS shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

OSEA vs. EFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
OSEA
EFAS

Technology

18.9%
0.1%

Industrials

16.2%
6.6%

Financial Services

15.3%
35.3%

Healthcare

11.6%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

9.6%
7.7%

Consumer Cyclical

5.6%
1.9%

Basic Materials

5.3%
1.9%

Utilities

3.5%
11.8%

Communication Services

3.1%
8.9%

Energy

-

10.3%

Real Estate

-

15.6%

Technology

OSEA
18.9%
EFAS
0.1%

Industrials

OSEA
16.2%
EFAS
6.6%

Financial Services

OSEA
15.3%
EFAS
35.3%

Healthcare

OSEA
11.6%
EFAS
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

OSEA
9.6%
EFAS
7.7%

Consumer Cyclical

OSEA
5.6%
EFAS
1.9%

Basic Materials

OSEA
5.3%
EFAS
1.9%

Utilities

OSEA
3.5%
EFAS
11.8%

Communication Services

OSEA
3.1%
EFAS
8.9%

Energy

OSEA

-

EFAS
10.3%

Real Estate

OSEA

-

EFAS
15.6%

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

OSEA vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

OSEA
OSEA Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
OSEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OSEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
OSEA Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
OSEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2525
Calmar Ratio Rank
OSEA Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

EFAS
EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

OSEA vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor International Compounders ETF (OSEA) 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.


OSEAEFASDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.52

-0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.75

6.07

-5.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.45

14.92

-12.46

OSEA vs. EFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OSEA Sharpe Ratio is 0.53, which is lower than the EFAS Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OSEA 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

OSEA vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OSEA drawdown since its inception was -18.14%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OSEA and EFAS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


OSEAEFASDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.14%

-44.38%

+26.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.08%

-5.30%

-5.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.14%

-11.84%

-6.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.12%

-0.90%

-2.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.84%

-6.99%

+3.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.39%

2.15%

+1.24%

Volatility

OSEA vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison

Harbor International Compounders ETF (OSEA) has a higher volatility of 4.22% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 2.71%. This indicates that OSEA'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


OSEAEFASDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.22%

2.71%

+1.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.00%

8.68%

+4.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.68%

10.95%

+4.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.61%

15.51%

+1.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.61%

18.23%

-1.62%

OSEA vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both OSEA and EFAS have an expense ratio of 0.55%.


Dividends

OSEA vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

OSEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than EFAS's 4.52% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EFAS
Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF
4.52%4.83%6.76%6.33%7.28%5.19%4.34%5.75%6.63%6.15%0.21%
OSEA
Harbor International Compounders ETF
1.23%1.24%0.51%0.65%0.11%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


OSEA 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.

OSEA has higher volatility (4.22%) compared to EFAS (2.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OSEA dropped -18.14% vs EFAS's -44.38%.

On 3-year performance, EFAS leads with 25.41% vs 7.19% for OSEA. Both ETFs have the same 0.55% expense ratio. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 2.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 25.41% return vs 7.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

OSEA and EFAS have the same expense ratio: 0.55% per year.

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.52%, compared with 1.23% for OSEA.

OSEA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while EFAS is Dividend. They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Global X.

EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 0.53), 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 OSEA and EFAS

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