Screener
EFA vs HSCZ
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF vs iShares Currency Hedged MSCI EAFE Small-Cap ETF
Key differences
- EFA costs 0.11% less per year.
- EFA is significantly larger than HSCZ — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- EFA covers global ex us markets; HSCZ covers global.
- Over the last 3 years, HSCZ has delivered higher annualized returns.
- EFA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| EFA | HSCZ | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.32% | 0.43% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $75.6B | $208M |
| Since | 2001 | 2015 |
| Dividend yield | 3.17% | 3.04% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global ex us | global |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +22.4% | +31.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | +16.0% | +18.7% |
| CAGR 5Y | +8.9% | +11.7% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.82 | 1.14 |
| Volatility 1Y | 15.12% | 11.28% |
| Max drawdown | -34.19% | -34.89% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to EFA and HSCZ
Explore further