Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

EZU vs IXUS: how they differ

EZU and IXUS hold 18% of their weight in the same names, and IXUS returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI Eurozone ETF and iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, EZU and IXUS hold 18% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions EZU and IXUS both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingEZUIXUS
ASML Holding N.V.8.10%1.32%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft3.08%0.53%
TOTALENERGIES SE2.25%0.43%
Banco Santander, S.A.2.37%0.42%
SAP SE2.44%0.41%
SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC SE2.22%0.41%
Allianz SE2.18%0.41%
Siemens Energy AG1.89%0.39%
Iberdrola, S.A.1.89%0.35%
LVMH MOET HENNESSY LOUIS VUITTON SE1.76%0.31%
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A.1.72%0.30%
L'AIR LIQUIDE SOCIETE ANONYME POUR L'ETU1.54%0.29%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in EZUOnly in IXUS
Ferrovial N.V. 0.45%Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa 4.04%
SK hynix Inc. 1.15%
Tencent Holdings Limited 0.91%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 0.75%
ASTRAZENECA PLC 0.69%
Alibaba Group Holding Limited 0.67%
Novartis AG 0.66%
Nestle S.A. 0.61%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

EZU and IXUS on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
EZU
iShares MSCI Eurozone ETF
IXUS
iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI EurozoneCore MSCI Total International Stock
Total return, 1 year+18.0%+22.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.5 pts+4.7 pts
Expense ratio0.50%0.07%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings2264185

EZU in plain words

EZU is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI Eurozone. 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 0.50% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 226 positions, with the top ten at 28.2%. It sat 3.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

IXUS in plain words

IXUS is an index equity fund tracking the Core MSCI Total International Stock. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.2% 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 4185 positions, with the top ten at 12.6%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, EZU or IXUS?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, EZU returned +18.0% and IXUS returned +22.2%, so IXUS returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, EZU or IXUS?
EZU charges 0.50% a year and IXUS charges 0.07%, so IXUS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do EZU and IXUS overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of EZU and 0% of IXUS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 18% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

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.

EZU against IXUS, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, EZU against IXUS, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/EZU-IXUS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources