We compare locally issued Brazilian ETFs and Brazilian Depositary Receipts (BDRs) of foreign ETFs that track the same international benchmark. The central question is simple: are BDRs of ETFs dominated by local ETFs? We analyze 8 benchmark groups — S&P 500, MSCI ACWI, MSCI China, LBMA Gold, MSCI Asia ex-Japan, MSCI EAFE, MSCI Emerging Markets, and FTSE NAREIT US REITs — and 18 funds from December 2020 to February 2025. At the daily horizon, the answer appears to be yes: local ETFs exhibit lower tracking error than BDRs in all 8 groups (and in 9 of the 10 asset-by-asset comparisons), with an average raw difference of 42 bps; controlling for trading volume, the estimated advantage is 14–16 bps per day. This dominance, however, is only partial. The advantage of local ETFs is largely transitory: it falls sharply in weekly returns and virtually disappears when we analyze cumulative dispersion at annual horizons. The microstructural channel behind this transitory noise appears to be related to the lower liquidity of BDRs — Roll-implied effective spreads about 2 times larger and a higher incidence of low-volume trading days. In addition, administration fees vary substantially across groups: BDRs are cheaper in S&P 500 and US REITs, more expensive in Asia ex-Japan, China, and Emerging Markets, and broadly equivalent in ACWI, EAFE, and Gold. Thus, for retail investors with a buy-and-hold horizon and order sizes consistent with available liquidity, BDRs are not necessarily dominated: the appropriate choice depends more on administration fees and product availability than on daily tracking error.