EZA vs VTI
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. EZA delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EZA | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $559M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 7.88% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 33 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +3.50% | +13.67% | |
| 1Y Return | +33.69% | +22.17% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +28.60% | +21.93% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.09% | +12.51% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.9% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -68.2% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 3, 2003 | May 24, 2001 |
EZA vs VTI Performance
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EZA returned +33.69% while VTI returned +22.17%. Year to date, EZA is up 3.50% versus a gain of 13.67% for VTI.
Over three years, EZA compounded at +28.60% per year against +21.93% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +14.09% and +12.51% respectively. Across the full 24-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.11% annualized vs +6.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EZA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.9% compared with 15.3% for VTI. 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 -68.2% for EZA and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.63. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EZA charges 0.59% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $3 annually, a gap of $56 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EZA currently yields 7.88% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
EZA and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2815 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EZA or VTI?
EZA has an expense ratio of 0.59% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $56 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EZA or VTI?
Over the past year EZA returned +33.69% vs +22.17% for VTI, so EZA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (24 years), EZA annualized +6.67% vs +8.11% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EZA or VTI?
EZA has been the more volatile fund at 25.9% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: EZA -68.2% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both EZA and VTI?
EZA and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.63, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EZA and VTI?
EZA and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2815 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EZA or VTI?
EZA yields 7.88% while VTI yields 1.07%, so EZA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.