ASHR vs. EWW
ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund) and EWW (iShares MSCI Mexico ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASHR is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index, while EWW is a Latin America Equities fund tracking the MSCI Mexico IMI 25/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ASHR returned 5.65%/yr vs 7.89%/yr for EWW. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ASHR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EWW.
Performance
ASHR vs. EWW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ASHR achieves a 7.49% return, which is significantly lower than EWW's 13.18% return. Over the past 10 years, ASHR has underperformed EWW with an annualized return of 5.65%, while EWW has yielded a comparatively higher 7.89% annualized return.
ASHR
- 1D
- 0.83%
- 1M
- -0.45%
- YTD
- 7.49%
- 6M
- 9.62%
- 1Y
- 35.11%
- 3Y*
- 11.43%
- 5Y*
- -1.32%
- 10Y*
- 5.65%
EWW
- 1D
- 1.46%
- 1M
- 1.63%
- YTD
- 13.18%
- 6M
- 13.14%
- 1Y
- 33.34%
- 3Y*
- 10.87%
- 5Y*
- 13.02%
- 10Y*
- 7.89%
ASHR vs. EWW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund | 7.49% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -27.52% | -1.57% | 36.29% | 36.50% | -28.45% | 33.47% |
EWW iShares MSCI Mexico ETF | 13.18% | 53.65% | -28.22% | 40.32% | 1.24% | 20.27% | -3.06% | 12.64% | -14.58% | 14.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASHR and EWW is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2013 | 0.35 |
ASHR vs. EWW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ASHR
EWW
Technology
-
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Communication Services
Real Estate
Technology
ASHR
EWW
-
Financial Services
ASHR
EWW
Industrials
ASHR
EWW
Basic Materials
ASHR
EWW
Consumer Defensive
ASHR
EWW
Consumer Cyclical
ASHR
EWW
Healthcare
ASHR
EWW
Utilities
ASHR
EWW
-
Energy
ASHR
EWW
-
Communication Services
ASHR
EWW
Real Estate
ASHR
EWW
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
ASHR vs. EWW — Risk / Return Rank
ASHR
EWW
ASHR vs. EWW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR) and iShares MSCI Mexico ETF (EWW). 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.
| ASHR | EWW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.48 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.27 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.41 | 2.32 | +2.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.89 | 8.25 | +4.64 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASHR vs. EWW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASHR drawdown since its inception was -51.30%, smaller than the maximum EWW drawdown of -64.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHR and EWW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASHR | EWW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -51.30% | -64.94% | +13.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.69% | -13.98% | +6.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -33.12% | -31.17% | -1.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.59% | -31.17% | -13.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -51.30% | -53.62% | +2.32% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.64% | -3.40% | -14.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -29.15% | -18.51% | -10.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.63% | 3.93% | -1.30% |
Volatility
ASHR vs. EWW - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund (ASHR) is 6.04%, while iShares MSCI Mexico ETF (EWW) has a volatility of 6.96%. This indicates that ASHR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EWW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASHR | EWW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.04% | 6.96% | -0.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.08% | 18.46% | -6.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.24% | 21.76% | -4.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.92% | 22.58% | +1.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.06% | 25.39% | -1.33% |
ASHR vs. EWW - Expense Ratio Comparison
ASHR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than EWW's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
ASHR vs. EWW - Dividend Comparison
ASHR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, less than EWW's 3.07% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares Fund | 2.15% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
EWW iShares MSCI Mexico ETF | 3.07% | 3.48% | 4.39% | 2.19% | 3.64% | 2.06% | 1.43% | 2.92% | 2.30% | 2.22% | 1.77% | 2.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ASHR and EWW have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EWW has higher volatility (6.96%) compared to ASHR (6.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHR dropped -51.30% vs EWW's -64.94%.
On 10-year performance, EWW leads with 7.89% vs 5.65% for ASHR. On fees, EWW is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, ASHR has been the lower-risk option at 6.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EWW has performed better with a 7.89% return vs 5.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EWW is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHR.
EWW has the higher dividend yield at 3.07%, compared with 2.15% for ASHR.
ASHR is categorized as China Equities, while EWW is Latin America Equities. ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index, while EWW tracks MSCI Mexico IMI 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: DWS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHR and 0.49% for EWW.
ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs 1.49), 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.
Find the right allocation for ASHR and EWW
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