PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ASEA vs. EMM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASEA achieves a 9.50% return, which is significantly lower than EMM's 34.52% return.


ASEA

1D
-0.69%
1M
3.21%
YTD
9.50%
6M
12.22%
1Y
26.01%
3Y*
14.54%
5Y*
9.70%
10Y*
7.64%

EMM

1D
0.62%
1M
11.16%
YTD
34.52%
6M
40.49%
1Y
65.12%
3Y*
23.15%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASEA vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
9.50%19.80%9.82%3.25%
EMM
Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF
34.52%30.21%2.34%3.40%

Correlation

The correlation between ASEA and EMM 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2023

0.57

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

ASEA vs. EMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ASEA
EMM

Financial Services

58.6%
25.0%

Industrials

15.4%
5.9%

Communication Services

8.8%
2.7%

Utilities

4.4%
1.2%

Energy

3.5%
4.8%

Real Estate

2.8%
1.8%

Healthcare

2.3%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.2%
5.1%

Basic Materials

2.1%
3.9%

Consumer Cyclical

-

2.7%

Technology

-

45.5%

Financial Services

ASEA
58.6%
EMM
25.0%

Industrials

ASEA
15.4%
EMM
5.9%

Communication Services

ASEA
8.8%
EMM
2.7%

Utilities

ASEA
4.4%
EMM
1.2%

Energy

ASEA
3.5%
EMM
4.8%

Real Estate

ASEA
2.8%
EMM
1.8%

Healthcare

ASEA
2.3%
EMM
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

ASEA
2.2%
EMM
5.1%

Basic Materials

ASEA
2.1%
EMM
3.9%

Consumer Cyclical

ASEA

-

EMM
2.7%

Technology

ASEA

-

EMM
45.5%

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

ASEA vs. EMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASEA
ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

EMM
EMM Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
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. 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.


ASEAEMMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.87

3.02

-1.15

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.74

3.87

-1.13

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.54

-0.20

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.16

4.51

-1.35

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.72

18.92

-10.20

ASEA vs. EMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASEA Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is lower than the EMM Sharpe Ratio of 3.02. 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ASEAEMMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.87

3.02

-1.15

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

1.20

-0.93

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ASEAEMMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.16%

-21.99%

-22.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.28%

-14.75%

+6.47%

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

-2.81%

0.00%

-2.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.66%

-4.69%

-5.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.99%

3.51%

-0.52%

Volatility

ASEA vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) is 3.40%, while Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a volatility of 9.67%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ASEAEMMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.40%

9.67%

-6.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.20%

19.23%

-8.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.01%

21.66%

-7.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.66%

18.83%

-4.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.59%

18.83%

-1.24%

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 3.61%, more than EMM's 0.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
3.61%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
0.67%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


ASEA and EMM 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.

EMM has higher volatility (9.67%) compared to ASEA (3.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASEA dropped -44.16% vs EMM's -21.99%.

On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 23.15% vs 14.54% for ASEA. On fees, ASEA is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, EMM has performed better with a 23.15% return vs 14.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.61%, compared with 0.67% for EMM.

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

EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs 1.87), 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 ASEA and EMM

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