ASEA vs. EMM

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

ASEA (Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF) and EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASEA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index, while EMM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund actively managed by Global X. ASEA is passively managed, while EMM is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ASEA returned 15.87%/yr vs 17.56%/yr for EMM. Their 0.55 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ASEA charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMM.

Performance

ASEA vs. EMM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASEA achieves a 17.89% return, which is significantly lower than EMM's 21.70% return.

ASEA

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: 7.20%
• 6M: 10.70%
• YTD: 17.89%
• 1Y: 33.20%
• 3Y*: 15.87%
• 5Y*: 12.90%
• 10Y*: 7.69%
• ALL TIME*: 5.38%

EMM

• 1D: 1.09%
• 1M: -4.48%
• 6M: 12.18%
• YTD: 21.70%
• 1Y: 40.77%
• 3Y*: 17.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.27%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	$373.34K	$548.14K	$590.36K
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	$209.26K	$283.91K	$450.77K

ASEA vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	17.89%	19.80%	9.82%	4.05%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	21.70%	30.21%	2.34%	2.99%

Correlation

The correlation between ASEA and EMM is 0.53, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2023	0.55

The correlation between ASEA and EMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

ASEA vs. EMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ASEA	EMM
Financial Services	60.3%	20.9%
Industrials	15.6%	9.9%
Communication Services	8.0%	1.7%
Utilities	4.3%	1.2%
Energy	3.2%	4.5%
Real Estate	2.8%	1.6%
Healthcare	2.2%	1.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	4.3%
Basic Materials	1.5%	3.8%
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	2.6%
Technology	-	48.1%

Return for Risk

ASEA vs. EMM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ASEA

ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 88
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 89
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 79

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 63
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 65
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

ASEA vs. EMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). 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	EMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.33	1.54	+0.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.30	2.09	+1.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.29	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.03	2.33	+1.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.75	8.08	+2.66

ASEA vs. EMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASEA Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is higher than the EMM Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASEA and EMM, 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. EMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASEA drawdown since its inception was -44.16%, which is greater than EMM's maximum drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASEA and EMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASEA	EMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.16%	-21.99%	-22.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.28%	-17.62%	+9.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.20%	-21.99%	-0.21%
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	-0.33%	-11.92%	+11.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.56%	-4.85%	-5.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	5.06%	-1.96%

Volatility

ASEA vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) is 3.18%, while Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a volatility of 10.62%. This indicates that ASEA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASEA	EMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.18%	10.62%	-7.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.34%	24.66%	-13.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.37%	26.71%	-12.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.71%	20.47%	-5.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.49%	20.47%	-2.98%

ASEA vs. EMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASEA has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than EMM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASEA vs. EMM - Dividend Comparison

ASEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.67%, more than EMM's 0.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	3.67%	3.95%	3.61%	3.76%	2.23%	4.19%	2.27%	2.51%	3.08%	1.59%	2.78%	3.64%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.78%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%	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 EMM in my portfolio?

ASEA and EMM have a correlation of 0.53, 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 EMM?

EMM has higher volatility (10.62%) compared to ASEA (3.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASEA dropped -44.16% vs EMM's -21.99%.

Which ETF is better, ASEA or EMM?

On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 17.56% vs 15.87% for ASEA. On fees, ASEA is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASEA or EMM?

Over the 3-year period, EMM has performed better with a 17.56% return vs 15.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASEA or EMM?

ASEA is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMM.

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

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 0.78% for EMM.

What is the main difference between ASEA and EMM?

ASEA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while EMM is Emerging Markets Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASEA and 0.75% for EMM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.54), 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.