Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

EWY vs IXUS: how they differ

EWY and IXUS hold 6% of their weight in the same names, and EWY returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI South Korea ETF and iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, EWY and IXUS hold 6% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions EWY and IXUS both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingEWYIXUS
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LTD22.13%2.21%
SK HYNIX24.02%1.79%
SK SQUARE3.01%0.18%
SAMSUNG ELECTRO MECHANICS LTD2.46%0.13%
KB FINANCIAL GROUP1.92%0.10%
HYUNDAI MOTOR1.60%0.09%
SHINHAN FINANCIAL GROUP1.57%0.08%
DOOSAN ENERBILITY LTD1.35%0.07%
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS NON VOTING PRE0.07%0.29%
HANA FINANCIAL GROUP1.31%0.06%
HANWHA AEROSPACE LTD1.23%0.06%
SAMSUNG SDI LTD1.21%0.06%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in EWYOnly in IXUS
ETD KRW BALANCE WITH R93546 0.30%TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING 4.49%
LG UPLUS 0.18%ASML HOLDING 1.55%
SAMSUNG EPIS HOLDINGS LTD 0.03%HSBC HOLDINGS PLC 0.84%
ECOPRO BM CO LTD 0.01%TENCENT HOLDINGS 0.78%
ROCHE PS PAR AG 0.70%
ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 0.68%
SHELL PLC 0.62%
MITSUBISHI UFJ FINANCIAL GROUP 0.59%

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 Sep 10, 2026.

EWY and IXUS on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
EWY
iShares MSCI South Korea ETF
IXUS
iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI South KoreaCore MSCI Total International Stock
Total return, 1 year+147.9%+22.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+130.4 pts+4.7 pts
Expense ratio0.59%0.07%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings802540

EWY in plain words

EWY is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI South Korea. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +147.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.59% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 80 positions, with the top ten at 61.9%. It sat 13.9% below its high of Jun 18, 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 Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2540 positions, with the top ten at 14.3%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, EWY or IXUS?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, EWY returned +147.9% and IXUS returned +22.2%, so EWY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, EWY or IXUS?
EWY charges 0.59% a year and IXUS charges 0.07%, so IXUS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do EWY and IXUS overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of EWY and 0% of IXUS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 6% 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.

EWY against IXUS, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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, EWY against IXUS, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/ewy-vs-ixus Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources