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

Performance

TXUG vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Thornburg International Growth ETF (TXUG) 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, TXUG achieves a 9.55% return, which is significantly lower than EFAS's 12.96% return.


TXUG

1D
-0.64%
1M
4.08%
YTD
9.55%
6M
9.59%
1Y
5.65%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

EFAS

1D
-0.58%
1M
-0.80%
YTD
12.96%
6M
17.29%
1Y
28.68%
3Y*
24.47%
5Y*
12.04%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TXUG vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between TXUG and EFAS is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 24, 2025

0.47

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

TXUG vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank

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

TXUG
TXUG Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
TXUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TXUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
TXUG Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
TXUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
TXUG Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

EFAS
EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

TXUG vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Thornburg International Growth ETF (TXUG) 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.


TXUGEFASDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.47

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.44

5.44

-5.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.21

14.48

-13.27

TXUG vs. EFAS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TXUG Sharpe Ratio is 0.34, which is lower than the EFAS Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TXUG 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TXUGEFASDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

2.73

-2.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.56

-0.27

Drawdowns

TXUG vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TXUG drawdown since its inception was -18.58%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TXUG and EFAS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TXUGEFASDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.58%

-44.38%

+25.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.93%

-5.30%

-7.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.64%

-3.01%

+2.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.21%

-7.08%

+2.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.67%

1.99%

+2.68%

Volatility

TXUG vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison

Thornburg International Growth ETF (TXUG) has a higher volatility of 5.32% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 2.96%. This indicates that TXUG'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


TXUGEFASDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.32%

2.96%

+2.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.29%

8.20%

+6.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.93%

10.60%

+6.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.61%

15.59%

+4.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.61%

18.33%

+1.28%

TXUG vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison

TXUG has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAS's 0.56% expense ratio.


Dividends

TXUG vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison

TXUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.47%, less than EFAS's 5.05% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EFAS
Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF
5.05%4.83%6.76%6.33%7.28%5.19%4.34%5.75%6.63%6.15%0.21%
TXUG
Thornburg International Growth ETF
0.47%0.51%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


TXUG and EFAS have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TXUG has higher volatility (5.32%) compared to EFAS (2.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TXUG dropped -18.58% vs EFAS's -44.38%.

On 1-year performance, EFAS leads with 28.68% vs 5.65% for TXUG. On fees, EFAS is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 2.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 28.68% return vs 5.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EFAS is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for TXUG.

EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 5.05%, compared with 0.47% for TXUG.

They also come from different issuers: Thornburg and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for TXUG and 0.56% for EFAS.

EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 0.34), 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 TXUG 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