Screener
SUSA vs EMXF
iShares ESG Optimized MSCI USA ETF vs iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF
Key differences
- EMXF costs 0.09% less per year.
- SUSA is significantly larger than EMXF — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- SUSA covers north america markets; EMXF covers emerging markets.
- SUSA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| SUSA | EMXF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.25% | 0.16% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $3.8B | $148M |
| Since | 2005 | 2020 |
| Dividend yield | 0.88% | 3.03% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | emerging markets |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +26.3% | +45.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | +21.3% | +21.6% |
| CAGR 5Y | +11.9% | +8.2% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.13 | 1.01 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.47% | 18.54% |
| Max drawdown | -32.93% | -33.13% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to SUSA and EMXF
Explore further