PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AIA vs. ASEA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AIA vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 37.37% return, which is significantly higher than ASEA's 17.61% return. Over the past 10 years, AIA has outperformed ASEA with an annualized return of 13.37%, while ASEA has yielded a comparatively lower 7.72% annualized return.


AIA

1D
1.38%
1M
-0.63%
6M
22.48%
YTD
37.37%
1Y
66.32%
3Y*
32.09%
5Y*
12.22%
10Y*
13.37%
ALL TIME*
7.82%

ASEA

1D
-0.56%
1M
6.95%
6M
10.72%
YTD
17.61%
1Y
32.88%
3Y*
15.21%
5Y*
13.10%
10Y*
7.72%
ALL TIME*
5.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$72.11M$68.43M$74.19M
$394.47K$542.80K$604.39K

AIA vs. ASEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AIA
iShares Asia 50 ETF
37.37%47.79%20.26%4.32%-24.08%-10.91%33.73%22.21%-14.22%45.00%
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
17.61%19.80%9.82%4.88%5.24%4.66%-7.88%8.34%-7.58%35.06%

Correlation

The correlation between AIA and ASEA is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.51

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.52

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.56

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2011

0.65

The correlation between AIA and ASEA shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.65 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AIA vs. ASEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AIA
ASEA

Technology

57.5%

-

Financial Services

20.6%
60.3%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
0.7%

Communication Services

7.2%
8.0%

Industrials

2.0%
15.6%

Healthcare

0.9%
2.2%

Energy

0.6%
3.2%

Real Estate

0.5%
2.8%

Basic Materials

0.5%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.1%

Utilities

-

4.3%

Technology

AIA
57.5%
ASEA

-

Financial Services

AIA
20.6%
ASEA
60.3%

Consumer Cyclical

AIA
9.5%
ASEA
0.7%

Communication Services

AIA
7.2%
ASEA
8.0%

Industrials

AIA
2.0%
ASEA
15.6%

Healthcare

AIA
0.9%
ASEA
2.2%

Energy

AIA
0.6%
ASEA
3.2%

Real Estate

AIA
0.5%
ASEA
2.8%

Basic Materials

AIA
0.5%
ASEA
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

AIA

-

ASEA
2.1%

Utilities

AIA

-

ASEA
4.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AIA vs. ASEA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

AIA
AIA Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

ASEA
ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

AIA vs. ASEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


AIAASEADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.43

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.81

4.22

-0.41

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.04

11.27

+0.76

AIA vs. ASEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is comparable to the ASEA Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIA and ASEA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

AIA vs. ASEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, which is greater than ASEA's maximum drawdown of -44.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and ASEA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AIAASEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.89%

-44.16%

-16.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.83%

-8.28%

-8.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.64%

-22.20%

+0.56%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.99%

-22.20%

-23.79%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-54.64%

-44.16%

-10.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.13%

-0.56%

-10.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.61%

-10.56%

-6.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.32%

3.10%

+2.22%

Volatility

AIA vs. ASEA - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 11.50% compared to Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) at 3.39%. This indicates that AIA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AIAASEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.50%

3.39%

+8.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.26%

11.34%

+16.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.64%

14.53%

+17.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.69%

14.71%

+11.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.17%

17.49%

+6.68%

AIA vs. ASEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than ASEA's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

AIA vs. ASEA - Dividend Comparison

AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, less than ASEA's 3.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AIA
iShares Asia 50 ETF
1.60%2.50%2.78%2.07%2.59%1.54%1.11%2.24%2.49%1.45%2.29%2.88%
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
3.67%3.95%3.61%3.76%2.23%4.19%2.27%2.51%3.08%1.59%2.78%3.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


AIA and ASEA have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AIA has higher volatility (11.50%) compared to ASEA (3.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs ASEA's -44.16%.

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 13.37% vs 7.72% for ASEA. On fees, AIA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AIA has performed better with a 13.37% return vs 7.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AIA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 1.60% for AIA.

AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index, while ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AIA and 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 2.03), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AIA and ASEA

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer