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

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 37.37% return, which is significantly higher than GMF's 9.90% return. Over the past 10 years, AIA has outperformed GMF with an annualized return of 13.37%, while GMF has yielded a comparatively lower 9.14% 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%

GMF

1D
0.96%
1M
-1.17%
6M
6.20%
YTD
9.90%
1Y
20.83%
3Y*
15.74%
5Y*
6.38%
10Y*
9.14%
ALL TIME*
7.12%
*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
$1.14M$1.33M$1.43M

AIA vs. GMF - 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%
GMF
SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF
9.90%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 0.90, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


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

0.90

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

0.91

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

0.92

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

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 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIA vs. GMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AIA
GMF

Technology

57.5%
36.9%

Financial Services

20.6%
13.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
8.2%

Communication Services

7.2%
5.4%

Industrials

2.0%
4.1%

Healthcare

0.9%
2.2%

Energy

0.6%
1.5%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.5%

Basic Materials

0.5%
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.7%

Utilities

-

0.8%

Technology

AIA
57.5%
GMF
36.9%

Financial Services

AIA
20.6%
GMF
13.2%

Consumer Cyclical

AIA
9.5%
GMF
8.2%

Communication Services

AIA
7.2%
GMF
5.4%

Industrials

AIA
2.0%
GMF
4.1%

Healthcare

AIA
0.9%
GMF
2.2%

Energy

AIA
0.6%
GMF
1.5%

Real Estate

AIA
0.5%
GMF
0.5%

Basic Materials

AIA
0.5%
GMF
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

AIA

-

GMF
1.7%

Utilities

AIA

-

GMF
0.8%

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. GMF — 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

GMF
GMF Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
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. 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.


AIAGMFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.95

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.20

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.81

1.59

+2.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.04

5.21

+6.83

AIA vs. GMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIA Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the GMF Sharpe Ratio of 1.07. 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.


Loading charts...

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AIAGMFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.89%

-67.18%

+6.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.83%

-12.62%

-4.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.64%

-21.43%

-0.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.99%

-33.78%

-12.21%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-54.64%

-40.18%

-14.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.13%

-5.49%

-5.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.61%

-16.49%

-0.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.32%

3.85%

+1.47%

Volatility

AIA vs. GMF - Volatility Comparison

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 11.50% compared to SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) at 6.53%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AIAGMFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.50%

6.53%

+4.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.26%

16.09%

+12.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.64%

18.80%

+12.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

26.69%

18.82%

+7.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.17%

19.28%

+4.89%

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 1.60%, more than GMF's 1.22% 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%
GMF
SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF
1.22%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


AIA and GMF have a correlation of 0.90, 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 GMF (6.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs GMF's -67.18%.

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 13.37% vs 9.14% for GMF. On fees, GMF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 6.53%. 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 9.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

AIA has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 1.22% for 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.

AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.07), 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 GMF

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