REFA vs. EFAV
REFA (Columbia Research Enhanced International Equity ETF) and EFAV (iShares MSCI EAFE Min Vol Factor ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - REFA tracks the Beta Advantage Research Enhanced International Equity Index while EFAV tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. REFA charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for EFAV.
Performance
REFA vs. EFAV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, REFA achieves a 11.14% return, which is significantly higher than EFAV's 5.16% return.
REFA
- 1D
- 1.35%
- 1M
- 2.81%
- 6M
- 9.75%
- YTD
- 11.14%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EFAV
- 1D
- 2.06%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- 6M
- 4.66%
- YTD
- 5.16%
- 1Y
- 9.34%
- 3Y*
- 13.32%
- 5Y*
- 6.36%
- 10Y*
- 6.08%
REFA vs. EFAV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
REFA Columbia Research Enhanced International Equity ETF | 11.14% | 0.33% |
EFAV iShares MSCI EAFE Min Vol Factor ETF | 5.16% | 1.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between REFA and EFAV is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2025 | 0.76 |
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
REFA vs. EFAV — Risk / Return Rank
REFA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
EFAV
REFA vs. EFAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Research Enhanced International Equity ETF (REFA) and iShares MSCI EAFE Min Vol Factor ETF (EFAV). 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.
| REFA | EFAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.16 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.36 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 3.26 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
REFA vs. EFAV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum REFA drawdown since its inception was -11.23%, smaller than the maximum EFAV drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for REFA and EFAV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| REFA | EFAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.23% | -27.56% | +16.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -8.75% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.46% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -27.56% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.36% | -4.39% | +4.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.79% | -4.77% | +1.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.79% | — |
Volatility
REFA vs. EFAV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| REFA | EFAV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.80% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 8.80% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.61% | 10.72% | +7.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.61% | 11.86% | +6.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.61% | 13.03% | +5.58% |
REFA vs. EFAV - Expense Ratio Comparison
REFA has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAV's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
REFA vs. EFAV - Dividend Comparison
REFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%, less than EFAV's 3.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFAV iShares MSCI EAFE Min Vol Factor ETF | 3.21% | 3.20% | 3.24% | 3.08% | 2.53% | 2.47% | 1.33% | 4.19% | 3.34% | 2.45% | 3.94% | 2.49% |
REFA Columbia Research Enhanced International Equity ETF | 0.03% | 0.03% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
REFA and EFAV have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EFAV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EFAV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for REFA.
EFAV has the higher dividend yield at 3.21%, compared with 0.03% for REFA.
REFA tracks Beta Advantage Research Enhanced International Equity Index, while EFAV tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility (USD) Index. They also come from different issuers: Columbia Threadneedle and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for REFA and 0.20% for EFAV.
Find the right allocation for REFA and EFAV
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