PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QEFA vs. EFG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QEFA vs. EFG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QEFA achieves a 6.80% return, which is significantly lower than EFG's 7.91% return. Over the past 10 years, QEFA has outperformed EFG with an annualized return of 8.67%, while EFG has yielded a comparatively lower 7.96% annualized return.


QEFA

1D
-0.49%
1M
1.69%
YTD
6.80%
6M
8.78%
1Y
17.29%
3Y*
14.76%
5Y*
7.62%
10Y*
8.67%

EFG

1D
-0.78%
1M
4.62%
YTD
7.91%
6M
9.06%
1Y
14.40%
3Y*
10.91%
5Y*
4.23%
10Y*
7.96%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QEFA vs. EFG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QEFA
SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF
6.80%29.25%2.27%17.40%-14.03%12.50%6.76%21.91%-10.39%24.03%
EFG
iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF
7.91%20.70%1.53%17.55%-23.12%11.01%17.85%27.47%-12.93%28.86%

Correlation

The correlation between QEFA and EFG is 0.91, 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

0.91

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.92

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2014

0.84

The correlation between QEFA and EFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

QEFA vs. EFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QEFA
EFG

Financial Services

14.3%
10.6%

Healthcare

11.6%
14.2%

Technology

10.1%
18.1%

Industrials

8.7%
29.6%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
10.7%

Energy

5.1%
0.2%

Basic Materials

4.9%
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
5.1%

Communication Services

3.3%
4.8%

Utilities

2.7%
1.1%

Real Estate

1.8%
1.0%

Financial Services

QEFA
14.3%
EFG
10.6%

Healthcare

QEFA
11.6%
EFG
14.2%

Technology

QEFA
10.1%
EFG
18.1%

Industrials

QEFA
8.7%
EFG
29.6%

Consumer Cyclical

QEFA
5.7%
EFG
10.7%

Energy

QEFA
5.1%
EFG
0.2%

Basic Materials

QEFA
4.9%
EFG
4.6%

Consumer Defensive

QEFA
4.2%
EFG
5.1%

Communication Services

QEFA
3.3%
EFG
4.8%

Utilities

QEFA
2.7%
EFG
1.1%

Real Estate

QEFA
1.8%
EFG
1.0%

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

QEFA vs. EFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QEFA
QEFA Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
QEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
QEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
QEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
QEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank

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

QEFA vs. EFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) 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.


QEFAEFGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.16

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.81

1.13

+0.68

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.52

4.17

+2.35

QEFA vs. EFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is higher than the EFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEFA 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QEFAEFGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.37

0.85

+0.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.23

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

0.45

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.29

+0.14

Drawdowns

QEFA vs. EFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEFA drawdown since its inception was -31.71%, smaller than the maximum EFG drawdown of -58.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEFA and EFG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QEFAEFGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.71%

-58.40%

+26.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.58%

-12.78%

+3.20%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.23%

-16.87%

+4.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.09%

-35.78%

+7.69%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.71%

-35.78%

+4.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.93%

-0.78%

-2.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.08%

-12.16%

+6.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.66%

3.46%

-0.80%

Volatility

QEFA vs. EFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) is 3.94%, while iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) has a volatility of 5.88%. This indicates that QEFA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QEFAEFGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.94%

5.88%

-1.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.25%

14.36%

-4.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.76%

17.08%

-4.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.77%

18.11%

-3.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.03%

17.69%

-1.66%

QEFA vs. EFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QEFA has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than EFG's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

QEFA vs. EFG - Dividend Comparison

QEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%, more than EFG's 2.34% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EFG
iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF
2.34%2.53%1.64%1.63%1.27%1.54%0.85%1.69%1.98%1.56%2.20%1.75%
QEFA
SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF
2.87%3.13%3.17%2.79%3.02%2.37%1.82%2.95%3.22%2.33%2.01%2.94%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, QEFA 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.

EFG has higher volatility (5.88%) compared to QEFA (3.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QEFA dropped -31.71% vs EFG's -58.40%.

On 10-year performance, QEFA leads with 8.67% vs 7.96% for EFG. On fees, QEFA is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QEFA has been the lower-risk option at 3.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QEFA has performed better with a 8.67% return vs 7.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QEFA is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EFG.

QEFA has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 2.34% for EFG.

QEFA tracks MSCI EAFE Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while EFG tracks MSCI EAFE Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QEFA and 0.40% for EFG.

QEFA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.85), 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 QEFA and EFG

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