Screener
EFA vs EFZ
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF vs ProShares Short MSCI EAFE
Key differences
- EFA costs 0.63% less per year.
- EFA is significantly larger than EFZ — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- EFA follows a index tracking strategy; EFZ uses inverse.
- Over the last 3 years, EFA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- EFA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| EFA | EFZ | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.32% | 0.95% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $75.6B | $16M |
| Since | 2001 | 2007 |
| Dividend yield | 3.17% | 3.97% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global ex us | global ex us |
| Strategy | index tracking | inverse |
| CAGR 1Y | +23.3% | -15.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +16.1% | -9.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | +9.2% | -6.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.83 | -0.79 |
| Volatility 1Y | 15.16% | 16.44% |
| Max drawdown | -34.19% | -61.90% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to EFA and EFZ
Explore further