EFA vs NUDM
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF vs Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF
Which is better, EFA or NUDM?
Nearly the same fund. NUDM costs less.
NUDM has a lower expense ratio. EFA led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, NUDM over 3Y. 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 23.4%.
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 | NUDM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.32% | 0.27%Best |
| AUM | $76.7B | $869M |
| Dividend Yield | 3.24% | 5.02% |
| Holdings | 682 | 188 |
| YTD Return | +7.56%Best | +6.62% |
| 1Y Return | +13.78%Best | +10.96% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.91% | +18.10%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.68%Best | +8.36% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 15.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -34.2% | -32.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,162Best | $14,940 |
| Top 10 Weight | 14.1%Best | 23.4% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Nuveen |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 14, 2001 | Jun 6, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 7, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (9.4 years).
EFA vs NUDM 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 9.4 years both funds cover.
EFA vs NUDM Performance
iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF (NUDM) is an ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year EFA returned +13.78% while NUDM returned +10.96%. Year to date, EFA is up 7.56% versus a gain of 6.62% for NUDM.
Over three years, EFA compounded at +17.91% per year against +18.10% for NUDM; over five years the annualized figures are +8.68% and +8.36% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, EFA has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +8.02%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NUDM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 15.3% for EFA. 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 -34.2% for EFA and -32.0% for NUDM. 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 NUDM charges 0.27%. On a $10,000 position that is $32 vs $27 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EFA currently yields 3.24% against 5.02% for NUDM.
Holdings Overlap
24.5% of EFA's money is in holdings NUDM also owns. 75.5% of NUDM's money is in holdings EFA also owns.
Most of NUDM is already inside EFA. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
114 positions in common, counted across the 655 positions we hold weights for in EFA and 155 in NUDM, against full books of 682 and 188.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 0 positions for NUDM that do not appear in our book for EFA (2.1% of the fund), and 7 for EFA that do not appear in NUDM (3.9%).
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 NUDM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NOVN:SMNovartis Ag Ordinary Shares | 1.22% | 2.30% | 1.08% |
| SIE:SGSiemens N Ag | 1.04% | 2.32% | 1.28% |
| SAP:SGSap Se | 1.00% | 2.04% | 1.04% |
| 8035:JPTokyo Electron Ltd. Com Stk | 0.83% | 2.00% | 1.17% |
| 9984:JPSoftbank Corp | 0.74% | 2.06% | 1.32% |
| CBA:AUCommonwealth Bank Of Australia | 0.81% | 1.84% | 1.03% |
| ABBN:SMAbb Ltd.[Abbn] | 0.70% | 1.88% | 1.18% |
| IBE:MAIberdrola Sa | 0.68% | 1.67% | 0.99% |
| NESN:SMNestle Sa | 1.08% | 1.10% | 0.02% |
| SU:PASchneider Electric | 0.85% | 1.31% | 0.46% |
75.5% of NUDM is already inside EFA.
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 NUDM?
EFA has an expense ratio of 0.32% while NUDM charges 0.27%. NUDM is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EFA or NUDM?
Over the past year EFA returned +13.78% vs +10.96% for NUDM, so EFA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), EFA annualized +8.09% vs +8.02% for NUDM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EFA or NUDM?
NUDM has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 15.3% for EFA. Worst drawdown: EFA -34.2% vs NUDM -32.0%.
Should I hold both EFA and NUDM?
EFA and NUDM 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 NUDM?
75.5% of NUDM's money is in holdings EFA also owns. 75.5% of NUDM's is in holdings EFA also owns. They hold 114 positions in common, counted across the 655 positions we hold weights for in EFA and 155 in NUDM.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFA or NUDM?
EFA yields 3.24% while NUDM yields 5.02%, so NUDM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NUDM better than EFA?
NUDM has a lower expense ratio. EFA led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, NUDM over 3Y. 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 23.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.