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

IEFA vs VXUS: how they differ

IEFA and VXUS hold 7% of their weight in the same names, and VXUS returned more over the year.

iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF and Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, IEFA and VXUS hold 7% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions IEFA and VXUS both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingIEFAVXUS
Allianz SE0.69%0.41%
Siemens Energy AG0.65%0.37%
UBS Group AG0.56%0.33%
Deutsche Telekom AG0.47%0.26%
GSK PLC0.42%0.25%
Zurich Insurance Group AG0.40%0.24%
Infineon Technologies AG0.35%0.21%
Muenchener Rueckversicherungs-Gesellscha0.31%0.18%
AXA SA0.32%0.18%
Nokia Oyj0.27%0.16%
Nordea Bank Abp0.23%0.14%
Aktiebolaget Volvo0.22%0.13%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in IEFAOnly in VXUS
ASML Holding N.V. 2.23%Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.97%
HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 1.25%Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 1.67%
ASTRAZENECA PLC 1.17%ASML Holding NV 1.32%
Novartis AG 1.11%SK hynix Inc 1.14%
Nestle S.A. 1.03%Tencent Holdings Ltd 0.89%
SHELL PLC 1.03%HSBC Holdings PLC 0.74%
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft 0.90%Alibaba Group Holding Ltd 0.69%
COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA 0.84%AstraZeneca PLC 0.67%

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.

IEFA and VXUS on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
IEFA
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF
VXUS
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanguard
What it isCore MSCI EAFETotal International Stock
Total return, 1 year+18.0%+22.3%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+0.5 pts+4.8 pts
Expense ratio0.07%0.05%
Already in the S&P 5000.1%0.0%
Holdings26328775

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%.

VXUS in plain words

VXUS is an index equity fund tracking the Total International Stock. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.05% 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 8775 positions, with the top ten at 12.4%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, IEFA or VXUS?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IEFA returned +18.0% and VXUS returned +22.3%, so VXUS returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, IEFA or VXUS?
IEFA charges 0.07% a year and VXUS charges 0.05%, so VXUS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do IEFA and VXUS overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of IEFA and 0% of VXUS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 7% 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.

IEFA against VXUS, 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, IEFA against VXUS, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IEFA-VXUS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources