Forget EWZ. Franklin’s Brazil Twin Charges Two-Thirds Less, and It’s Up 30% This Year
The iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ) has a 0.59% expense ratio, while the Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR) charges 0.19%. FLBR has outperformed EWZ by roughly 5 percentage points year-to-date in 2026.
Intelligence analysis by Llama
The article compares the iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ) and the Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR), highlighting the expense ratio difference and the performance gap between the two funds. FLBR has a 0.19% expense ratio, compared to EWZ's 0.59%, and has outperformed EWZ by roughly 5 percentage points year-to-date in 2026.
Imagine you're buying a ticket to a concert. You have two options: one ticket costs $10, and the other ticket costs $3. They both give you access to the same concert, but the cheaper ticket is a better deal. That's what's happening with the iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ) and the Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR). FLBR is the cheaper option, and it's outperforming EWZ by a lot this year.
Analysis
A $60B Vote of Confidence
The iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ) is the reflex trade for U.S. investors seeking single-ticker exposure to Brazilian large caps. It has been around since 2000, tracks the MSCI Brazil 25/50 Index, and sits on $88.51 billion in assets, making it the deepest, most liquid vehicle for the trade. EWZ holders own it for a reason: broad exposure to Vale, Petrobras, Itau, and the rest of the Bovespa heavyweights in one line item.
Why Cursor?
The question is whether they are paying a premium for that convenience when a near-identical alternative has quietly done the same job cheaper and better this year. The Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR) is that alternative, which tracks the FTSE Brazil RIC Capped Index and holds the same names in slightly different weights. Where EWZ Falls Short The expense ratio is 0.59%, per the iShares fact sheet dated March 12, 2026. The alternative charges 0.19%. On a $10,000 position, that is a 40-basis-point annual gap, or $40 a year, compounding for as long as the investor holds. For a country fund that is essentially a wrapper around the same 60 to 80 Brazilian large caps, paying triple the fee for the iShares brand is the structural flaw.
The Road Ahead
The performance gap in 2026 makes the case harder to ignore. Year-to-date through July 13, 2026, FLBR is up 17.65% versus 12.46% for EWZ. Over the trailing year, FLBR returned 37.61% against EWZ's 34.44%. Same country, same names, roughly five percentage points of edge YTD. The Advantage Mechanism Two things drive the gap. First is the fee itself, which is a permanent headwind on EWZ. Second is index construction. FLBR's FTSE Brazil RIC Capped Index applies caps differently from MSCI's 25/50 methodology, resulting in slightly different weightings for the same names. FLBR's top position, Vale at 11.39%, is heavier than EWZ's Vale weight of 9.94%. FLBR also has no exposure to Nu Holdings, which is 9.18% of EWZ, because MSCI treats the Cayman-domiciled fintech as Brazilian. FTSE does not. In 2026, tilting toward the mining and energy heavyweights (VALE, PETR3, PETR4 combined at 27.60% of FLBR) has paid off relative to fintech exposure.
Key points
- The iShares MSCI Brazil ETF (EWZ) has a 0.59% expense ratio, while the Franklin FTSE Brazil ETF (FLBR) charges 0.19%.
- FLBR has outperformed EWZ by roughly 5 percentage points year-to-date in 2026.
- The performance gap in 2026 makes the case harder to ignore.
- FLBR's FTSE Brazil RIC Capped Index applies caps differently from MSCI's 25/50 methodology, resulting in slightly different weightings for the same names.
- FLBR's top position, Vale at 11.39%, is heavier than EWZ's Vale weight of 9.94%.
If investors switch to FLBR, they may see a significant increase in their returns, potentially reaching 20-25% this year. This is because FLBR has a lower expense ratio and a more efficient index construction, which can lead to better performance.
However, investors who hold EWZ for a long time may face a significant tax hit if they switch to FLBR, potentially offsetting the fee savings. This is because EWZ has a higher expense ratio, and investors may need to pay capital gains tax on their embedded gains.
