EFA vs EFAA
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF vs Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF
Which is better, EFA or EFAA?
Nearly the same fund. EFA costs less.
EFA has a lower expense ratio. EFA led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. EFA is less concentrated, with 14.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 29.9%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EFA | EFAA |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.32%Best | 0.39% |
| AUM | $76.7B | $677M |
| Dividend Yield | 3.24% | 8.42% |
| Holdings | 682 | 708 |
| YTD Return | +7.56%Best | +6.32% |
| 1Y Return | +13.78%Best | +11.72% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.91% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.68% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.4% | 8.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -14.1% | -12.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.2 years | $13,480Best | $12,955 |
| Top 10 Weight | 14.1%Best | 29.9% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 14, 2001 | Jul 17, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 17, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.2 years).
EFA vs EFAA growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.2 years both funds cover.
EFA vs EFAA Performance
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year EFA returned +13.78% while EFAA returned +11.72%. Year to date, EFA is up 7.56% versus a gain of 6.32% for EFAA.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EFA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.4% compared with 8.5% for EFAA. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -14.1% for EFA and -12.0% for EFAA. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EFA charges 0.32% per year while EFAA charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $32 vs $39 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EFA currently yields 3.24% against 8.42% for EFAA.
Holdings Overlap
70.9% of EFA's money is in holdings EFAA also owns. 54.2% of EFAA's money is in holdings EFA also owns.
Most of EFA is already inside EFAA. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
491 positions in common, counted across the 655 positions we hold weights for in EFA and 657 in EFAA, against full books of 682 and 708.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1 positions for EFAA that do not appear in our book for EFA (23.6% of the fund), and 0 for EFA that do not appear in EFAA (2.1%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EFA | Weight in EFAA | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| HSBA:LNHsbc Holdings Plc | 1.53% | 1.25% | 0.28% |
| SHELShell Plc | 1.28% | 0.97% | 0.31% |
| NOVN:SMNovartis AG | 1.22% | 0.87% | 0.35% |
| 8306:JPMitsubishi Ufj Financial Group, Inc. | 1.14% | 0.88% | 0.26% |
| AZN:LNAstraZeneca PLC | 1.12% | 0.83% | 0.29% |
| NESN:SMNestle Sa | 1.08% | 0.84% | 0.24% |
| BHP:AUBhp Group Ltd | 0.99% | 0.78% | 0.21% |
| SAP:SGSap Se | 1.00% | 0.72% | 0.28% |
| SU:PASchneider Electric SE | 0.85% | 0.64% | 0.21% |
| 7203:JPToyota Motor Corp | 0.82% | 0.65% | 0.17% |
70.9% of EFA is already inside EFAA.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EFA or EFAA?
EFA has an expense ratio of 0.32% while EFAA charges 0.39%. EFA is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EFA or EFAA?
Over the past year EFA returned +13.78% vs +11.72% for EFAA, so EFA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), EFA annualized +14.54% vs +12.49% for EFAA. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EFA or EFAA?
EFA has been the more volatile fund at 11.4% annualized versus 8.5% for EFAA. Worst drawdown: EFA -14.1% vs EFAA -12.0%.
Should I hold both EFA and EFAA?
EFA and EFAA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between EFA and EFAA?
70.9% of EFA's money is in holdings EFAA also owns. 54.2% of EFAA's is in holdings EFA also owns. They hold 491 positions in common, counted across the 655 positions we hold weights for in EFA and 657 in EFAA.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFA or EFAA?
EFA yields 3.24% while EFAA yields 8.42%, so EFAA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is EFAA better than EFA?
EFA has a lower expense ratio. EFA led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. EFA is less concentrated, with 14.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 29.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.