Screener
EEMA vs EFA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF vs iShares MSCI EAFE ETF
Key differences
- EFA costs 0.17% less per year.
- EFA is significantly larger than EEMA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- EEMA covers emerging markets markets; EFA covers global ex us.
- Over the last 3 years, EEMA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- EFA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| EEMA | EFA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.49% | 0.32% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $1.3B | $75.6B |
| Since | 2012 | 2001 |
| Dividend yield | 1.28% | 3.17% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | emerging markets | global ex us |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +46.6% | +22.4% |
| CAGR 3Y | +22.4% | +16.0% |
| CAGR 5Y | +7.1% | +8.9% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.95 | 0.82 |
| Volatility 1Y | 19.95% | 15.12% |
| Max drawdown | -44.18% | -34.19% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to EEMA and EFA
Explore further