Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
DIA vs IEFA: how they differ
DIA and IEFA are both equity index funds, and over the year IEFA returned more, +18.0% against +15.6%.
SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust and iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF.
| DIA SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust | IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | State Street | iShares |
| What it is | Dow Jones Industrial Average | Core MSCI EAFE |
| Total return, 1 year | +15.6% | +18.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −1.9 pts | +0.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | not published | 0.07% |
| Holdings | not filed | 2632 |
DIA in plain words
DIA is an index equity fund tracking the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +15.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. It sat 3.1% below its high of Aug 5, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
IEFA in plain words
IEFA is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI EAFE. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2632 positions, with the top ten at 11.5%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, DIA or IEFA?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DIA returned +15.6% and IEFA returned +18.0%, so IEFA returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, DIA against IEFA, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DIA-IEFA Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources