AIA vs. GMF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) and GMF (SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - AIA tracks the S&P Asia 50 Index while GMF tracks the S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AIA returned 15.85%/yr vs 10.74%/yr for GMF. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AIA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GMF.

Performance

AIA vs. GMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 54.57% return, which is significantly higher than GMF's 16.28% return. Over the past 10 years, AIA has outperformed GMF with an annualized return of 15.85%, while GMF has yielded a comparatively lower 10.74% annualized return.

AIA

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: 12.30%
• YTD: 54.57%
• 6M: 58.84%
• 1Y: 97.46%
• 3Y*: 39.74%
• 5Y*: 13.26%
• 10Y*: 15.85%

GMF

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 6.38%
• YTD: 16.28%
• 6M: 16.39%
• 1Y: 34.42%
• 3Y*: 20.34%
• 5Y*: 6.32%
• 10Y*: 10.74%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AIA vs. GMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	54.57%	47.79%	20.26%	4.32%	-24.08%	-10.91%	33.73%	22.21%	-14.22%	45.00%
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	16.28%	21.99%	16.55%	8.20%	-18.99%	-1.93%	24.96%	19.92%	-14.25%	41.71%

Correlation

The correlation between AIA and GMF is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2007	0.91

The correlation between AIA and GMF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIA vs. GMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIA	GMF
Technology	63.8%	40.8%
Financial Services	16.4%	15.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	10.7%
Communication Services	7.4%	6.4%
Industrials	2.0%	7.3%
Healthcare	0.8%	4.5%
Energy	0.6%	3.1%
Real Estate	0.5%	1.0%
Basic Materials	-	5.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.9%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

AIA vs. GMF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AIA

AIA Risk / Return Rank: 92
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 91
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 93

GMF

GMF Risk / Return Rank: 60
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 61
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 58

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AIA vs. GMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) and SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF). 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.

	AIA	GMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.44	1.99	+1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.91	2.75	+1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.36	+0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.93	2.74	+4.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.86	9.97	+13.89

AIA vs. GMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 3.44, which is higher than the GMF Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIA and GMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AIA vs. GMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, smaller than the maximum GMF drawdown of -67.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and GMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIA	GMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.89%	-67.18%	+6.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.15%	-12.62%	-1.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.64%	-21.43%	-0.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.11%	-35.76%	-14.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.64%	-40.18%	-14.46%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.65%	-16.55%	-0.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.10%	3.46%	+0.64%

Volatility

AIA vs. GMF - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 14.76% compared to SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) at 7.39%. This indicates that AIA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIA	GMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.76%	7.39%	+7.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.07%	14.90%	+10.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.53%	17.44%	+11.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.13%	18.72%	+7.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.87%	19.26%	+4.61%

AIA vs. GMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than GMF's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIA vs. GMF - Dividend Comparison

AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than GMF's 1.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	1.42%	2.50%	2.78%	2.07%	2.59%	1.54%	1.11%	2.24%	2.49%	1.45%	2.29%	2.88%
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	1.69%	1.49%	1.92%	2.75%	2.54%	2.71%	1.32%	1.75%	2.26%	1.70%	2.49%	3.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIA and GMF in my portfolio?

AIA and GMF have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AIA or GMF?

AIA has higher volatility (14.76%) compared to GMF (7.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs GMF's -67.18%.

Which ETF is better, AIA or GMF?

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 15.85% vs 10.74% for GMF. On fees, GMF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 7.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIA or GMF?

Over the 10-year period, AIA has performed better with a 15.85% return vs 10.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIA or GMF?

GMF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AIA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIA or GMF?

GMF has the higher dividend yield at 1.69%, compared with 1.42% for AIA.

What is the main difference between AIA and GMF?

AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index, while GMF tracks S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AIA and 0.49% for GMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.44 vs 1.99), 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.