EFAA vs NTSI
Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF vs WisdomTree International Efficient Core Fund
Which is better, EFAA or NTSI?
Nearly the same fund. NTSI costs less.
NTSI has a lower expense ratio. EFAA led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97.
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 | EFAA | NTSI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.26%Best |
| AUM | $670M | $482M |
| Dividend Yield | 8.47% | 3.11% |
| Holdings | 1,376 | 926 |
| YTD Return | +6.08%Best | +5.13% |
| 1Y Return | +11.07%Best | +9.63% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +16.20% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +4.92% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.4%Best | 11.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -12.0%Best | -13.2% |
| $10,000 over 2.3 years | $12,983Best | $12,975 |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | WisdomTree Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 17, 2024 | May 20, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 17, 2024 to Nov 6, 2026 (2.3 years).
EFAA vs NTSI 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 2.3 years both funds cover.
EFAA vs NTSI Performance
Invesco MSCI EAFE Income Advantage ETF (EFAA) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and WisdomTree International Efficient Core Fund (NTSI) is an ETF from WisdomTree Investments. Over the past year EFAA returned +11.07% while NTSI returned +9.63%. Year to date, EFAA is up 6.08% versus a gain of 5.13% for NTSI.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NTSI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.9% compared with 8.4% 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 -12.0% for EFAA and -13.2% for NTSI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EFAA charges 0.39% per year while NTSI charges 0.26%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $26 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EFAA currently yields 8.47% against 3.11% for NTSI.
Holdings Overlap
At least 44.5% of EFAA's money is in holdings NTSI also owns.
Stated as a floor: for NTSI, our book for it covers 89.6% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
275 positions in common, counted across the 651 positions we hold weights for in EFAA and 441 in NTSI, against full books of 1,376 and 926.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EFAA | Weight in NTSI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| HSBA:LNHsbc Holdings Plc | 1.15% | 1.69% | 0.54% |
| SHELShell Plc | 1.07% | 1.75% | 0.68% |
| NOVN:SMNovartis Ag – Class N | 0.96% | 1.43% | 0.47% |
| NESN:SMNestle Sa | 0.87% | 1.18% | 0.31% |
| SAP:SGSap Se | 0.80% | 1.07% | 0.27% |
| AZN:LNAstraZeneca PLC | 0.88% | 0.98% | 0.10% |
| 7203:JPToyota Motor Corp | 0.64% | 1.06% | 0.42% |
| BHP:AUBhp Group Ltd | 0.76% | 0.89% | 0.13% |
| 6857:JPAdvantest Corp | 0.64% | 0.86% | 0.22% |
| CBA:AUCommonwealth Bank Of Australia | 0.63% | 0.83% | 0.20% |
44.5% of EFAA is already inside NTSI.
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, EFAA or NTSI?
EFAA has an expense ratio of 0.39% while NTSI charges 0.26%. NTSI is the cheaper option, by $13 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EFAA or NTSI?
Over the past year EFAA returned +11.07% vs +9.63% for NTSI, so EFAA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), EFAA annualized +12.02% vs +11.99% for NTSI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EFAA or NTSI?
NTSI has been the more volatile fund at 11.9% annualized versus 8.4% for EFAA. Worst drawdown: EFAA -12.0% vs NTSI -13.2%.
Should I hold both EFAA and NTSI?
EFAA and NTSI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, 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 EFAA and NTSI?
At least 44.5% of EFAA's money is in holdings NTSI also owns. Our book for NTSI is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 275 positions in common, counted across the 651 positions we hold weights for in EFAA and 441 in NTSI.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFAA or NTSI?
EFAA yields 8.47% while NTSI yields 3.11%, so EFAA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NTSI better than EFAA?
NTSI has a lower expense ratio. EFAA led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.