ASEA vs. ASIA

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

ASEA (Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF) and ASIA (Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds. ASEA is passively managed, while ASIA is actively managed. Over the past year, ASEA returned 25.68% vs 69.27% for ASIA. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ASEA charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for ASIA.

Performance

ASEA vs. ASIA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASEA achieves a 10.26% return, which is significantly lower than ASIA's 35.29% return.

ASEA

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: 3.06%
• YTD: 10.26%
• 6M: 13.28%
• 1Y: 25.68%
• 3Y*: 14.81%
• 5Y*: 9.92%
• 10Y*: 7.72%

ASIA

• 1D: 1.01%
• 1M: 14.04%
• YTD: 35.29%
• 6M: 39.74%
• 1Y: 69.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ASEA vs. ASIA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	10.26%	19.80%	9.82%	4.66%
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF	35.29%	32.06%	3.41%	0.01%

Correlation

The correlation between ASEA and ASIA is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2023	0.54

The correlation between ASEA and ASIA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

ASEA vs. ASIA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ASEA	ASIA
Financial Services	58.6%	17.6%
Industrials	15.4%	11.6%
Communication Services	8.8%	5.1%
Utilities	4.4%	-
Energy	3.5%	2.1%
Real Estate	2.8%	2.9%
Healthcare	2.3%	4.0%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	1.1%
Basic Materials	2.1%	2.5%
Consumer Cyclical	-	7.5%
Technology	-	46.6%

Return for Risk

ASEA vs. ASIA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASEA

ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 56
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 51

ASIA

ASIA Risk / Return Rank: 88
ASIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
ASIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
ASIA Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ASIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
ASIA Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

ASEA vs. ASIA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) and Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA). 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.

	ASEA	ASIA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	3.24	-1.39
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	3.93	-1.22
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.58	-0.25
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.22	4.87	-1.65
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.93	18.15	-9.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ASEA vs. ASIA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASEA Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is lower than the ASIA Sharpe Ratio of 3.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASEA and ASIA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ASEA	ASIA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.84	3.24	-1.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	1.28	-1.00

Drawdowns

ASEA vs. ASIA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASEA drawdown since its inception was -44.16%, which is greater than ASIA's maximum drawdown of -23.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASEA and ASIA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASEA	ASIA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.16%	-23.95%	-20.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.28%	-14.47%	+6.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.20%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.20%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.16%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.13%	0.00%	-2.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.66%	-4.86%	-5.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.99%	3.88%	-0.89%

Volatility

ASEA vs. ASIA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) is 3.44%, while Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) has a volatility of 9.73%. This indicates that ASEA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASEA	ASIA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.44%	9.73%	-6.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.18%	18.50%	-7.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.01%	21.51%	-7.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.65%	20.23%	-5.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.59%	20.23%	-2.64%

ASEA vs. ASIA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASEA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than ASIA's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASEA vs. ASIA - Dividend Comparison

ASEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.58%, more than ASIA's 0.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	3.58%	3.95%	3.61%	3.76%	2.23%	4.19%	2.27%	2.51%	3.08%	1.59%	2.78%	3.64%
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF	0.77%	1.05%	0.58%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASEA and ASIA in my portfolio?

ASEA and ASIA have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ASEA or ASIA?

ASIA has higher volatility (9.73%) compared to ASEA (3.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASEA dropped -44.16% vs ASIA's -23.95%.

Which ETF is better, ASEA or ASIA?

On 1-year performance, ASIA leads with 69.27% vs 25.68% for ASEA. On fees, ASEA is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASEA or ASIA?

Over the 1-year period, ASIA has performed better with a 69.27% return vs 25.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASEA or ASIA?

ASEA is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for ASIA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ASEA or ASIA?

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 0.77% for ASIA.

What is the main difference between ASEA and ASIA?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASEA and 0.79% for ASIA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.24 vs 1.84), 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.