ETF Comparison

EFA vs IEFA: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of iShares MSCI EAFE ETF and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Data updated August 14, 2026

Best for

EFAInvestors who want broad equity exposure.
IEFAInvestors who want broad equity exposure.

Jump to the side-by-side numbers

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
Metric	EFA	IEFA
Full name	iShares MSCI EAFE ETF	iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF
Issuer	iShares	iShares
Last Close	$108.64 as of August 14, 2026	$101.19 as of August 14, 2026
Distribution yield	3.01%	3.12%
Distribution Safety Score™	78	81
Expense ratio	0.33%	0.07%
AUM	$79.3B	$194B
Distribution frequency	Semi-Annual	Semi-Annual
Underlying index	MSCI EAFE Index (developed markets ex U.S. and Canada)	MSCI EAFE IMI Index
Objective	Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials.	Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials.
Asset class	Equity	Equity
Inception date	08/12/2001	10/18/2012
Beta	0.87	0.89
Last dividend	$1.6360	$1.5780
Ex-dividend date	06/15/2026	06/15/2026

Bottom lineEFA and IEFA are both for investors who want broad equity exposure — so strategy isn't the deciding factor here. Cost is: IEFA charges 0.07% against 0.33% for EFA, and between two funds this similar that gap comes straight out of your return every year you hold.

Model this comparison:

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

iShares

ETFs473

Total AUM$4664B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

iShares is one of the largest ETF providers globally, known for offering a broad, diversified lineup of exchange-traded funds across multiple asset classes and investment strategies. The company operates 215 funds spanning 15 distinct families, including popular offerings in dividend income, covered call strategies, bonds, equities, ESG-focused investments, and factor-based approaches, with widely-held tickers like AGG (bond), ACWI (global equity), and AOA (allocation). iShares is characterized by its comprehensive fund ecosystem that serves both core portfolio holdings and specialized investment strategies, making it a prominent player for investors seeking both traditional and alternative income-generating ETF solutions.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on EFA and IEFA.

See all iShares ETFs

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — free to start, no credit card.

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

EFA has outpaced IEFA over the trailing twelve months, posting a 22.61% total return against 22.41%. The picture flips over 10 years, though — IEFA has compounded at 9.55% a year, ahead of EFA at 9.47%. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
Symbol	YTD	1Y	3Y	5Y	10Y	Since Oct 2012	Volatility	Sharpe	Sortino	Max drawdown
EFA	13.73%	22.61%	18.45%	9.32%	9.47%	8.32%	15.3%	0.82	1.19	-14.1%
IEFA	13.83%	22.41%	18.53%	9.03%	9.55%	8.58%	15.3%	0.82	1.21	-13.8%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date, split-adjusted, as of August 14, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative; longer windows are annualized. “Since Oct 2012” measures every fund from October 22, 2012 — the youngest fund's first trading day — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Quick verdict

EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) and IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) are both semi-annual-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

IEFA offers the higher yield at 3.12% vs 3.01% for EFA. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

IEFA is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.07% compared to 0.33%.

They track different benchmarks: EFA is linked to MSCI EAFE Index (developed markets ex U.S. and Canada) while IEFA tracks MSCI EAFE IMI Index, which means their performance drivers differ.

IEFA is the larger fund by assets ($194B), which generally means tighter spreads and better liquidity.

Still deciding? Track EFA & IEFA for free

Create a free Dividend Vision account to keep them on a watchlist, get notified when they declare dividends, and see how much income they would add to your portfolio.

Add to my watchlist See what a free account includes

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, EFA would generate roughly $25.08/month, while IEFA would produce $26.00/month, at current distribution rates. Both pay semi-annual distributions.

EFA yield3.01%

IEFA yield3.12%

Monthly diff on $10K$0.92

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, EFA would cost approximately $330 in fees vs $70 for IEFA (simplified, not compounded). The $260.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

EFA ER0.33%

IEFA ER0.07%

Strategy & risk

EFA tracks MSCI EAFE Index (developed markets ex U.S. and Canada) with an index approach, while IEFA tracks MSCI EAFE IMI Index with an index approach. Beta is 0.87 for EFA and 0.89 for IEFA, indicating EFA is less volatile relative to the market.

EFA beta0.87

IEFA beta0.89

Fund details

EFA is managed by iShares (launched 08/12/2001) with $79.3B in assets. IEFA is managed by iShares (launched 10/18/2012) with $194B in assets.

EFA AUM$79.3B

IEFA AUM$194B

Ready to act?

Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution yield for EFA and IEFA?

EFA currently distributes 3.01% and IEFA 3.12%, based on fund data updated August 2026. Distribution yield moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is EFA or IEFA better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. IEFA currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between EFA and IEFA?

EFA (iShares MSCI EAFE ETF) tracks MSCI EAFE Index (developed markets ex U.S. and Canada) with an index approach, while IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) tracks MSCI EAFE IMI Index with an index approach. They are issued by iShares and iShares respectively.

Can I hold both EFA and IEFA?

Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.

Is EFA or IEFA safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — IEFA scores 81, EFA scores 78, so IEFA's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.

Which has lower fees, EFA or IEFA?

EFA has an expense ratio of 0.33% while IEFA charges 0.07%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in EFA vs IEFA generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in EFA would generate roughly $25.08 per month ($301.00 annually). The same in IEFA would produce about $26.00 per month ($312.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, EFA or IEFA?

More comparisons to explore

People also compare EFA with

People also compare IEFA with

Popular comparisons

EFA vs IEFA — at a glance

Generated August 15, 2026.

Overview

EFA and IEFA are both iShares ETFs that track developed markets outside the U.S. and Canada, but they differ in scope and cost structure. EFA tracks the standard MSCI EAFE Index (large and mid-cap stocks), while IEFA tracks the broader MSCI EAFE IMI Index, which adds small-cap exposure. The critical distinction is cost: IEFA's expense ratio of 0.07% undercuts EFA's 0.33% by a meaningful margin, and IEFA holds nearly $194B in assets compared to EFA's $79.3B.

How they differ

IEFA's inclusion of small-cap stocks via the IMI (Integrated Multiple Issue) methodology is the structural difference—it casts a wider net than EFA's large and mid-cap focus. The second major divergence is fees: IEFA's 0.07% expense ratio is less than one-quarter of EFA's 0.33%, creating a 26-basis-point annual drag favoring IEFA on identical returns. Distribution yields are nearly identical (IEFA at 3.12% versus EFA at 3.01%), both paid semi-annually, so yield-seeking investors will see negligible difference on that front. IEFA's larger AUM ($194B versus $79.3B) reflects its status as the "Core" offering in iShares' suite, suggesting it has become the mainstream choice since its 2012 inception. Beta is nearly identical between the two (0.89 for IEFA, 0.87 for EFA), indicating comparable market sensitivity.

Who each is best for

EFA: Fits investors who prefer the simplicity of large and mid-cap European, Australian, and Asian markets, or who were already holding the fund before lower-cost alternatives emerged and see no urgency to rebalance.

IEFA: Designed for investors seeking broad developed-markets exposure outside North America who prioritize cost efficiency and are comfortable adding small-cap diversification to their international allocation.

Key risks to know

Small-cap volatility in IEFA: The addition of small-cap stocks in the IMI index exposes IEFA to higher price swings and lower liquidity than EFA's large-and-mid-cap universe, which may amplify drawdowns in risk-off periods.
Currency exposure: Both ETFs carry unhedged exposure to the euro, British pound, yen, Australian dollar, and other developed-market currencies; strength in the dollar can erode returns regardless of underlying stock performance.
Developed-market growth constraints: Exposure is concentrated in mature economies with slower GDP growth and aging demographics compared to emerging markets, which may limit total return potential over extended periods.
Fee drag in low-return environments: While IEFA's cost advantage is meaningful, if developed ex-U.S. markets deliver returns below 7–8% annually over your holding period, fees will consume a larger proportion of gains.

Bottom line

If you value simplicity and large-cap European and developed-Asian markets, EFA offers a classic core holding. If you prioritize cost efficiency and are comfortable with small-cap inclusion, IEFA's 0.07% expense ratio and $194B scale make it the more economical choice for the same geographic exposure. Past performance does not guarantee future results, and both funds carry currency risk inherent to international equity holdings.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.

Learn the method

The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.

Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio

See how each ETF fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener