PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
TDGB.L vs. EZA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

TDGB.L vs. EZA

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

TDGB.L (VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF) and EZA (iShares MSCI South Africa ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TDGB.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Developed Markets Large Cap Dividend Leaders Screened Select Index, while EZA is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI South Africa Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, TDGB.L returned 10.61%/yr vs 8.68%/yr for EZA. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TDGB.L charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for EZA.

Performance

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) and iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

TDGB.L is traded in GBP, while EZA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EZA values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TDGB.L achieves a 10.34% return, which is significantly higher than EZA's -2.31% return. Over the past 10 years, TDGB.L has outperformed EZA with an annualized return of 10.61%, while EZA has yielded a comparatively lower 8.68% annualized return.

TDGB.L

1D
0.29%
1M
2.00%
YTD
10.34%
6M
11.70%
1Y
29.39%
3Y*
20.39%
5Y*
17.98%
10Y*
10.61%

EZA

1D
0.98%
1M
-4.68%
YTD
-2.31%
6M
2.51%
1Y
32.37%
3Y*
20.97%
5Y*
10.64%
10Y*
8.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		10.34%30.90%10.66%9.04%22.49%19.59%-5.61%3.88%-7.98%2.87%
EZA
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF		-2.31%62.72%9.03%-3.57%6.10%8.93%-7.97%5.65%-20.81%24.26%

Correlation

The correlation between TDGB.L and EZA is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

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

0.33

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

0.31

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

0.33

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2016

0.33

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
TDGB.L
EZA

Financial Services

31.7%
32.1%

Energy

19.7%

-

Healthcare

14.4%
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

10.1%
2.4%

Communication Services

8.7%
6.7%

Utilities

6.2%

-

Industrials

3.9%
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

3.8%
14.7%

Basic Materials

1.2%
39.7%

Technology

0.3%

-

Real Estate

0.0%
1.6%

Financial Services

TDGB.L
31.7%
EZA
32.1%

Energy

TDGB.L
19.7%
EZA

-

Healthcare

TDGB.L
14.4%
EZA
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

TDGB.L
10.1%
EZA
2.4%

Communication Services

TDGB.L
8.7%
EZA
6.7%

Utilities

TDGB.L
6.2%
EZA

-

Industrials

TDGB.L
3.9%
EZA
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

TDGB.L
3.8%
EZA
14.7%

Basic Materials

TDGB.L
1.2%
EZA
39.7%

Technology

TDGB.L
0.3%
EZA

-

Real Estate

TDGB.L
0.0%
EZA
1.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF

iShares MSCI South Africa ETF

Often compared with TDGB.L:
TDGB.L vs. VHYL.ASTDGB.L vs. SCHDTDGB.L vs. SPYDTDGB.L vs. LDEG.LTDGB.L vs. VHYD.LTDGB.L vs. JEGP.LTDGB.L vs. CSKR.L
Often compared with EZA:
EZA vs. AFKEZA vs. KSAEZA vs. SPYEZA vs. PAF.LEZA vs. VTIEZA vs. SCHDEZA vs. INDA

Return for Risk

TDGB.L vs. EZA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
TDGB.L
TDGB.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
TDGB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank
EZA
EZA Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
EZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
EZA Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
EZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
EZA Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
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.

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) and iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA). 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.

TDGB.LEZADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.14
1.12

+2.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.38
1.59

+2.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.21

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.28

1.44

+4.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.78

3.78

+17.00

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TDGB.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is higher than the EZA Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TDGB.L and EZA, 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

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TDGB.L drawdown since its inception was -32.94%, smaller than the maximum EZA drawdown of -54.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TDGB.L and EZA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

TDGB.LEZADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.94%

-54.38%

+21.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.66%

-22.51%

+17.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.42%

-22.51%

+10.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-12.42%

-28.58%

+16.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.94%

-53.90%

+20.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.18%

-17.58%

+17.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.93%

-14.35%

+9.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.41%

8.59%

-7.18%

Volatility

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF (TDGB.L) is 2.06%, while iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) has a volatility of 10.43%. This indicates that TDGB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EZA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

TDGB.LEZADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.06%

10.43%

-8.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.06%

24.70%

-17.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.31%

29.13%

-19.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.44%

25.57%

-14.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.76%

29.10%

-15.34%

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Expense Ratio Comparison

TDGB.L has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than EZA's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

TDGB.L vs. EZA - Dividend Comparison

TDGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.16%, less than EZA's 6.34% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EZA
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF		6.34%6.16%7.26%2.84%3.90%2.05%5.51%12.27%3.81%1.55%4.10%3.03%
TDGB.L
VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders UCITS ETF		3.16%3.50%4.26%4.93%4.40%4.06%4.16%4.52%4.38%3.48%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

TDGB.L and EZA have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, TDGB.L is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

TDGB.L is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EZA.

TDGB.L is categorized as Global Equities, while EZA is Emerging Markets Equities. TDGB.L tracks Morningstar Developed Markets Large Cap Dividend Leaders Screened Select Index, while EZA tracks MSCI South Africa Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for TDGB.L and 0.59% for EZA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TDGB.L and EZA

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