EFV vs IVLU: Weighing Two iShares International Value ETFs

Key Takeaways

• Both funds are passively managed international developed-market value ETFs, but they track different indexes: EFV follows the MSCI EAFE Value Index, while IVLU follows the MSCI World ex USA Enhanced Value Index.
• EFV is significantly larger — roughly $30 billion in assets under management (AUM) — and broader, holding about 400-plus securities, giving it a deep liquidity advantage over IVLU, which holds around 350 names and manages roughly $4.5 billion.
• EFV carries a heavy financials tilt (about 40% of assets), whereas IVLU is more balanced across sectors, with a lower financials weight and greater exposure to industrials and information technology.
• Both funds charge an identical 0.31% net expense ratio, but IVLU uses an enhanced, multi-factor value methodology that produces lower valuation multiples — a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio near 14 and price-to-book (P/B) ratio near 1.4, versus roughly 15 and 1.7 for EFV.
• Geographically, IVLU tilts more toward Japan (about 30%) and includes a small Canada sleeve, while EFV is anchored by the United Kingdom and excludes Canada entirely.
• Tickeron AI Verdict: Based on factor refinement, sector balance, and cheaper valuation metrics, IVLU is the current AI-favored choice of the two.

Why These ETFs Stand Out Now

International value investing has drawn renewed attention as investors look beyond expensive U.S. growth equities for diversification and cheaper valuations. In this ETF comparison, EFV and IVLU are natural rivals: both are issued by iShares (BlackRock), both target developed-market equities outside the U.S., and both emphasize the value factor. Yet they are not interchangeable. EFV is a broad, cap-weighted value slice of the EAFE universe, while IVLU is a narrower, rules-based fund that scores and weights stocks using multiple fundamental value signals. Understanding these structural differences is essential for investors deciding which vehicle better suits their sector exposure and risk objectives.

A Closer Look at EFV

EFV is a passive, index-tracking fund that seeks to replicate the MSCI EAFE Value Index, a subset of developed-market stocks in Europe, Australasia, and the Far East that exhibit value characteristics. Launched in 2005, it is one of the oldest and most established international value ETFs, with roughly $30 billion in assets and around 400 to 420 holdings. The fund is notable for its pronounced financials overweight, which represents roughly 40% of the portfolio — far above the broader market. Industrials and consumer staples follow at around 9–10% each, with health care and energy near 7%. Information technology is a minor position at roughly 2–3%, reflecting the classic value profile. Top holdings include HSBC, Shell, Nestlé, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Roche, and Allianz. By geography, Japan (about 24%) and the United Kingdom (about 16%) dominate, followed by France, Germany, and Switzerland. The net expense ratio is 0.31%, and the fund offers strong liquidity with tight bid/ask spreads. I also checked this using Tickeron’s AI Screener to see how the holdings stack up against peers.

A Closer Look at IVLU

IVLU is also a passive, rules-based fund, but it tracks the MSCI World ex USA Enhanced Value Index. Rather than simply filtering for value, this benchmark selects large- and mid-cap developed-market stocks using multiple fundamental value metrics and weights them by a combination of those metrics and market capitalization. Launched in 2015, the fund holds roughly 350 securities and manages about $4.5 billion in assets. The portfolio is more sector-diversified than EFV: financials lead at about 29%, with industrials near 18%, health care near 9%, and information technology close to 9% — a meaningful difference that adds growth-adjacent exposure. Consumer discretionary, materials, and consumer staples each contribute roughly 6–7%. Top holdings include HSBC, Toyota, Shell, Banco Santander, BNP Paribas, and British American Tobacco. Japan is the largest country weight at about 30%, ahead of the United Kingdom, Germany, and France, and the fund includes a small Canadian allocation. Its expense ratio is 0.31%.

Current Market Backdrop

Both funds are shaped by a global rotation toward value and cyclical sectors. Elevated interest rates in recent market cycles have supported bank net interest margins, benefiting the financial-heavy exposures of both portfolios, while steady energy prices have buttressed holdings in Shell and TotalEnergies. Japan has been a particular bright spot, aided by corporate governance reforms and shareholder-return initiatives, which favors IVLU's higher Japan weighting. Conversely, a strong U.S. dollar and uneven European growth remain headwinds for the EAFE complex as a whole. Regulatory shifts in banking and capital requirements also influence the large financials allocations that anchor both funds, making sector concentration a key risk to monitor.

Performance and Positioning

In recent weeks and across recent market cycles, both funds have benefited from the international value trade, but their relative positioning has diverged. IVLU has generally exhibited stronger momentum, aided by its lower valuation multiples, higher Japan exposure, and lighter financials concentration, which has reduced single-sector drawdown risk during periods of banking volatility. EFV, by contrast, has offered steadier, dividend-supported returns and superior liquidity, making it a favorite among large institutional allocations. On a volatility basis, IVLU tends to run modestly higher, consistent with its more concentrated factor tilt. The distinction is one of breadth versus factor purity: EFV provides broad value exposure, while IVLU delivers a sharper, more refined value signal.

Using Tools for Deeper Analysis

From what I see, comparing these ETFs side by side highlights clear trade-offs in liquidity, sector balance, and valuation. One thing that stands out is how IVLU’s enhanced methodology keeps multiples lower while still maintaining solid diversification.

Tickeron’s AI Screener in Practice

When comparing ETFs like these, I often rely on Tickeron’s AI Screener to quickly scan holdings, sector weights, and valuation metrics across the broader market. It helps surface comparable names and refine ideas based on technical patterns and fundamentals without spending hours on manual work. The tool has become a regular part of my workflow for spotting relative strengths in international value strategies.

Disclaimer

The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.

Disclaimers and Limitations

Contributor

Scott Bell|Expert

I’m a trader and independent researcher. My interest lies at the intersection of financial markets, algorithms, and capital management. I develop data-driven tools and strategies and study algorithmic approaches to market analysis. I help turn complex market data into clear insights and practical systems. I believe technology should support, not replace, investment thinking

Notable companies

Industry description

Market Cap

High and low price notable news

Volume