Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
EPOL vs EWL: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, EPOL returned +32.2% to EWL's +14.5%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about EPOL and EWL
Net assets: $1.0bn on Oct 27, 2026 for iShares MSCI Poland ETF, and $3.0bn on Oct 28, 2026 for iShares MSCI Switzerland ETF.
Pair scorecard
EWL costs 0.09 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 17.7 points; EWL is 2.9 times larger.
| Measure | EPOL | EWL |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +32.2% | +14.5% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.4%, high on Sep 8, 2026 | |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | MSCI Poland IMI 25/50 Index | MSCI Switzerland 25/50 Index |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.59% | 0.50% |
| Net assets, as of Oct 23, 2026 | $998m | $2.9bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 0% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 65.9% | 65.3% |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Oct 27, 2026. Method
Risk and return
Jun 4, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026 · 855 weekly returnsEach against its own benchmark: EPOL against EEM, Jun 4, 2010 to Oct 23, 2026; EWL against ACWX, Apr 11, 2008 to Oct 23, 2026.
EWL returned more: +365.6% to +194.2%. EWL swung less: 16.2% to 26.2%. EWL fell less at its worst: −28.3% to −63.6%.
Full scorecard
19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓
| Measure | EPOL | EWL | Edge | How it is measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return | ||||
| Total return | +194.2% | +365.6% | EWL | Price change plus distributions, reinvested. |
| Annualized | +6.8% | +9.8% | EWL | Total return as a yearly rate. |
| Price return | +84.6% | +225.0% | EWL | Price change alone, distributions left out. |
| Risk | ||||
| Volatility | 26.2% | 16.2% | EWL | Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier. |
| Downside deviation | 18.4% | 11.3% | EWL | Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate. |
| Max drawdown | −63.6% | −28.3% | EWL | Deepest fall from a high to the low after it. |
| Upside capture | 89.0% | 77.0% | Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose. | |
| Downside capture | 93.5% | 85.4% | Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better. | |
| Beta | 0.92 | 0.80 | Not an edge | How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves. |
| R squared | 0.47 | 0.76 | Not an edge | Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains. |
| Risk-adjusted | ||||
| Sharpe | 0.32 | 0.56 | EWL | Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility. |
| Sortino | 0.46 | 0.81 | EWL | Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation. |
| Treynor | 0.092 | 0.090 | Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta. | |
| Calmar | 0.11 | 0.35 | EWL | Annualized return divided by the max drawdown. |
| Against the benchmark | ||||
| Benchmark | EEM | ACWX | The ETF each fund is measured against. | |
| Alpha | +3.3% a year | +3.2% a year | Not significant | Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts. |
| Alpha t-stat | 0.71 | 1.55 | Not an edge | How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance. |
| Alpha range | −5.9% to +12.6% | −0.8% to +7.2% | Includes zero | The 95% range for the yearly alpha. |
| Information ratio | 0.15 | 0.22 | Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error. | |
| Tracking error | 19.1% | 9.7% | Not an edge | How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized. |
Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 855 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, EPOL and EWL hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Oct 27, 2026.
half
0% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
EPOL and EWL on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
EPOL and EWL are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- What each follows. EPOL follows MSCI Poland IMI 25/50 Index and EWL follows MSCI Switzerland 25/50 Index.
- Holdings in common. 0% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Oct 27, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 EPOL returned +32.2% and EWL +14.5% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 17.7 points.
Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
EPOL
EPOL tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +32.2% with distributions reinvested, against +16.3% for its benchmark, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.59% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 33 positions, with the top ten at 65.9%. It sat 3.4% below its high of Sep 8, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
EWL
EWL tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.5% with distributions reinvested, against +14.3% for its benchmark, the MSCI ACWI ex USA Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.50% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 43 positions, with the top ten at 65.3%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, EPOL or EWL?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, EPOL returned +32.2% and EWL +14.5%.
- Which is cheaper, EPOL or EWL?
- EWL is cheaper, by 0.09 percentage points a year. That is about $9 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, EPOL against EWL, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/epol-vs-ewl
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). EPOL against EWL. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/epol-vs-ewl
[EPOL against EWL (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/epol-vs-ewl)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.