PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
AIA vs. EEMA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

AIA vs. EEMA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) and EEMA (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds from iShares - AIA tracks the S&P Asia 50 Index while EEMA tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AIA returned 13.37%/yr vs 9.33%/yr for EEMA. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

AIA vs. EEMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA). 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 EEMA's 18.44% return. Over the past 10 years, AIA has outperformed EEMA with an annualized return of 13.37%, while EEMA has yielded a comparatively lower 9.33% 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%

EEMA

1D
0.83%
1M
-2.07%
6M
10.69%
YTD
18.44%
1Y
36.15%
3Y*
19.22%
5Y*
7.24%
10Y*
9.33%
ALL TIME*
6.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

AIA

iShares Asia 50 ETF
$72.11M$68.43M$74.19M

EEMA

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
$19.41M$13.70M$20.34M

AIA vs. EEMA - 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%
EEMA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF		18.44%33.27%10.23%6.57%-21.49%-4.22%25.17%18.60%-15.76%43.41%

Correlation

The correlation between AIA and EEMA is 0.96 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

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

0.96

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

0.94

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

0.95

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

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2012

0.92

The correlation between AIA and EEMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIA vs. EEMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
AIA
EEMA

Technology

57.5%
40.7%

Financial Services

20.6%
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
9.9%

Communication Services

7.2%
6.6%

Industrials

2.0%
8.4%

Healthcare

0.9%
3.9%

Energy

0.6%
2.7%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.0%

Basic Materials

0.5%
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.8%

Utilities

-

1.7%

Technology

AIA
57.5%
EEMA
40.7%

Financial Services

AIA
20.6%
EEMA
17.0%

Consumer Cyclical

AIA
9.5%
EEMA
9.9%

Communication Services

AIA
7.2%
EEMA
6.6%

Industrials

AIA
2.0%
EEMA
8.4%

Healthcare

AIA
0.9%
EEMA
3.9%

Energy

AIA
0.6%
EEMA
2.7%

Real Estate

AIA
0.5%
EEMA
1.0%

Basic Materials

AIA
0.5%
EEMA
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

AIA

-

EEMA
2.8%

Utilities

AIA

-

EEMA
1.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Asia 50 ETF

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF

Often compared with AIA:
AIA vs. VPLAIA vs. SPYAIA vs. IOOAIA vs. IEMGAIA vs. GMFAIA vs. VWOAIA vs. EPP
Often compared with EEMA:
EEMA vs. GMFEEMA vs. VFEM.LEEMA vs. MATFXEEMA vs. VAPX.ASEEMA vs. GXCEEMA vs. MCHIEEMA vs. EET

Return for Risk

AIA vs. EEMA — 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
EEMA
EEMA Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
EEMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMA Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMA Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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. EEMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA). 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.

AIAEEMADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.03
1.46

+0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.52
1.99

+0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.27

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.81

2.43

+1.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.04

7.50

+4.53

AIA vs. EEMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the EEMA Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIA and EEMA, 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. EEMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, which is greater than EEMA's maximum drawdown of -44.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and EEMA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

AIAEEMADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.89%

-44.18%

-16.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.83%

-14.30%

-2.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.64%

-20.23%

-1.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.99%

-38.31%

-7.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-54.64%

-44.18%

-10.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.13%

-8.62%

-2.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.61%

-13.88%

-2.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.32%

4.62%

+0.70%

Volatility

AIA vs. EEMA - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 11.50% compared to iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) at 7.90%. This indicates that AIA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EEMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

AIAEEMADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.50%

7.90%

+3.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.26%

21.26%

+7.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.64%

23.81%

+7.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.69%

21.02%

+5.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.17%

21.12%

+3.05%

AIA vs. EEMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AIA and EEMA have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

AIA vs. EEMA - Dividend Comparison

AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, more than EEMA's 1.39% 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%
EEMA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF		1.39%1.48%1.74%2.02%1.78%2.19%1.15%1.86%2.17%1.74%1.74%2.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.96, AIA and EEMA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

AIA has higher volatility (11.50%) compared to EEMA (7.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs EEMA's -44.18%.

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 13.37% vs 9.33% for EEMA. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, EEMA has been the lower-risk option at 7.90%. 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 9.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

AIA and EEMA have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

AIA has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 1.39% for EEMA.

AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index, while EEMA tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index.

AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.46), 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 EEMA

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