Screener
EFRA vs SUSA
iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF vs iShares ESG Optimized MSCI USA ETF
Key differences
- SUSA costs 0.22% less per year.
- SUSA is significantly larger than EFRA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- EFRA covers global markets; SUSA covers north america.
- Over the last 3 years, SUSA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- SUSA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| EFRA | SUSA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.47% | 0.25% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $6M | $3.8B |
| Since | 2022 | 2005 |
| Dividend yield | 1.56% | 0.88% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +11.8% | +27.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | +11.7% | +21.2% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +12.3% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.58 | 1.13 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.09% | 12.47% |
| Max drawdown | -16.25% | -32.93% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to EFRA and SUSA
Explore further