Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IEFA vs MAGS: how they differ
IEFA and MAGS hold 0% of their weight in the same names, and IEFA returned more over the year.
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IEFA and MAGS hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in IEFA | Only in MAGS |
|---|---|
| ASML Holding N.V. 2.23% | TREASURY BILL 65.41% |
| HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.25% | Roundhill Ultra Short Duration 8.06% |
| ASTRAZENECA PLC 1.17% | NVIDIA Corp 4.15% |
| Novartis AG 1.11% | Apple Inc 4.12% |
| Nestle S.A. 1.03% | Amazon.com Inc 4.11% |
| SHELL PLC 1.03% | Tesla Inc 4.07% |
| Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 0.90% | Microsoft Corp 3.62% |
| COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA 0.84% | Meta Platforms Inc 3.59% |
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 Jun 30, 2026.
| IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF | MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Roundhill |
| What it is | Core MSCI EAFE | Magnificent Seven |
| Total return, 1 year | +18.0% | +14.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +0.5 pts | −3.1 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.07% | 0.30% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 0.1% | 26.5% |
| Holdings | 2632 | 9 |
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%.
MAGS in plain words
MAGS is an index equity fund tracking the Magnificent Seven. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +14.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.30% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 26% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 9 positions, with the top ten at 100.0%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IEFA or MAGS?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IEFA returned +18.0% and MAGS returned +14.4%, so IEFA returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IEFA or MAGS?
- IEFA charges 0.07% a year and MAGS charges 0.30%, so IEFA is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IEFA and MAGS overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IEFA and 26% of MAGS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 0% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IEFA against MAGS, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IEFA-MAGS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources