ASEA vs. CNYA

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

ASEA (Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASEA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index, while CNYA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASEA returned 7.45%/yr vs 5.28%/yr for CNYA. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ASEA charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.

Performance

ASEA vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASEA achieves a 15.16% return, which is significantly higher than CNYA's 3.41% return. Over the past 10 years, ASEA has outperformed CNYA with an annualized return of 7.45%, while CNYA has yielded a comparatively lower 5.28% annualized return.

ASEA

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 5.93%
• 6M: 12.43%
• YTD: 15.16%
• 1Y: 30.27%
• 3Y*: 15.61%
• 5Y*: 12.26%
• 10Y*: 7.45%

CNYA

• 1D: -3.04%
• 1M: -3.13%
• 6M: -1.30%
• YTD: 3.41%
• 1Y: 24.47%
• 3Y*: 9.03%
• 5Y*: -1.52%
• 10Y*: 5.28%

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

ASEA vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	15.16%	19.80%	9.82%	4.88%	5.24%	4.66%	-7.88%	8.34%	-7.58%	35.06%
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	3.41%	26.48%	10.78%	-13.76%	-26.51%	3.53%	41.54%	35.95%	-26.56%	30.99%

Correlation

The correlation between ASEA and CNYA is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.32
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016	0.38

The correlation between ASEA and CNYA shifts across timeframes, from 0.32 (3 years) to 0.42 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ASEA vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ASEA	CNYA
Financial Services	11.1%	17.6%
Industrials	5.9%	15.4%
Communication Services	3.5%	1.3%
Energy	3.1%	3.1%
Real Estate	2.8%	0.6%
Utilities	1.4%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	6.8%
Healthcare	1.1%	3.9%
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	5.2%
Basic Materials	0.2%	11.2%
Technology	-	31.7%

Return for Risk

ASEA vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASEA

ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 80
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 80
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 68

CNYA

CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 54
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 45
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.

	ASEA	CNYA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	1.27	+0.84
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	1.80	+1.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.23	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.67	3.16	+0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.72	8.38	+1.34

ASEA vs. CNYA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASEA Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is higher than the CNYA Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASEA and CNYA, 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

ASEA vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASEA drawdown since its inception was -44.16%, smaller than the maximum CNYA drawdown of -49.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASEA and CNYA.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASEA	CNYA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.16%	-49.49%	+5.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.28%	-7.77%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.20%	-33.35%	+11.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.20%	-44.65%	+22.45%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.16%	-49.49%	+5.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-18.08%	+18.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.60%	-20.62%	+10.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.12%	2.93%	+0.19%

Volatility

ASEA vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) is 3.98%, while iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a volatility of 8.65%. This indicates that ASEA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASEA	CNYA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.98%	8.65%	-4.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.58%	14.98%	-3.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.48%	19.41%	-4.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.73%	24.02%	-9.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.48%	23.59%	-6.11%

ASEA vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASEA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASEA vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison

ASEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.75%, more than CNYA's 1.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	3.75%	3.95%	3.61%	3.76%	2.23%	4.19%	2.27%	2.51%	3.08%	1.59%	2.78%	3.64%
CNYA iShares MSCI China A ETF	1.82%	1.92%	2.51%	4.23%	2.69%	1.11%	1.06%	1.21%	3.92%	0.97%	1.38%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASEA and CNYA in my portfolio?

ASEA and CNYA have a correlation of 0.42, 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 CNYA?

CNYA has higher volatility (8.65%) compared to ASEA (3.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASEA dropped -44.16% vs CNYA's -49.49%.

Which ETF is better, ASEA or CNYA?

On 10-year performance, ASEA leads with 7.45% vs 5.28% for CNYA. On fees, CNYA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASEA or CNYA?

Over the 10-year period, ASEA has performed better with a 7.45% return vs 5.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASEA or CNYA?

CNYA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

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

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.75%, compared with 1.82% for CNYA.

What is the main difference between ASEA and CNYA?

ASEA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while CNYA is China Equities. ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASEA and 0.60% for CNYA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.27), 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.