APEX.L vs. CEA1.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

APEX.L (Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc) and CEA1.L (iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, from Amundi and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, APEX.L returned 6.96%/yr vs 7.64%/yr for CEA1.L. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. APEX.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CEA1.L.

Performance

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc (APEX.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

APEX.L is traded in USD, while CEA1.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the CEA1.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, APEX.L achieves a 26.16% return, which is significantly lower than CEA1.L's 27.71% return.

APEX.L

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 2.99%
• YTD: 26.16%
• 6M: 27.37%
• 1Y: 45.79%
• 3Y*: 24.46%
• 5Y*: 6.96%
• 10Y*: —

CEA1.L

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 3.36%
• YTD: 27.71%
• 6M: 29.23%
• 1Y: 48.73%
• 3Y*: 25.79%
• 5Y*: 7.64%
• 10Y*: 11.36%

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

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
APEX.L Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc	26.16%	32.38%	11.51%	4.94%	-19.91%	16.10%	29.94%
CEA1.L iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)	27.71%	34.67%	11.78%	6.11%	-21.37%	-5.09%	51.06%

Correlation

The correlation between APEX.L and CEA1.L is 0.95, 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	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2020	0.88

The correlation between APEX.L and CEA1.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	APEX.L	CEA1.L
Technology	48.5%	51.5%
Financial Services	15.9%	13.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	9.1%
Industrials	7.4%	6.6%
Communication Services	6.0%	6.6%
Basic Materials	3.0%	3.2%
Healthcare	2.6%	2.7%
Energy	2.2%	2.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	2.0%
Utilities	1.6%	1.3%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.7%

Return for Risk

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

APEX.L

APEX.L Risk / Return Rank: 74
APEX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
APEX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
APEX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 74
APEX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
APEX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 74

CEA1.L

CEA1.L Risk / Return Rank: 87
CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CEA1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CEA1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 88
CEA1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
CEA1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc (APEX.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L). 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.

	APEX.L	CEA1.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.22	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.80	2.88	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.41	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.55	3.49	+0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.22	12.32	-0.10

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current APEX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of APEX.L and CEA1.L, 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

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum APEX.L drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum CEA1.L drawdown of -98.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for APEX.L and CEA1.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	APEX.L	CEA1.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.11%	-98.42%	+57.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.85%	-13.90%	+1.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.72%	-22.84%	+4.12%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.29%	-41.26%	+0.97%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.54%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.43%	-5.83%	+0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.70%	-14.81%	+0.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.74%	3.95%	-0.21%

Volatility

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan UCITS ETF - Acc (APEX.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L) have volatilities of 10.32% and 10.34%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	APEX.L	CEA1.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.32%	10.34%	-0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.24%	19.56%	-0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.68%	22.00%	-0.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.61%	24.66%	-4.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.47%	22.20%	-0.73%

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

APEX.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CEA1.L's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

APEX.L vs. CEA1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither APEX.L nor CEA1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both APEX.L and CEA1.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, APEX.L and CEA1.L 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.

Which ETF is better, APEX.L or CEA1.L?

On fees, CEA1.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, APEX.L or CEA1.L?

CEA1.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for APEX.L.

What is the main difference between APEX.L and CEA1.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for APEX.L and 0.20% for CEA1.L.