BKEM vs. ECNS
BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and ECNS (iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index while ECNS tracks the MSCI China Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BKEM returned 7.37%/yr vs -6.97%/yr for ECNS. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BKEM charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for ECNS.
Performance
BKEM vs. ECNS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BKEM achieves a 30.24% return, which is significantly higher than ECNS's -4.50% return.
BKEM
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- 8.75%
- YTD
- 30.24%
- 6M
- 32.64%
- 1Y
- 57.21%
- 3Y*
- 24.11%
- 5Y*
- 7.37%
- 10Y*
- —
ECNS
- 1D
- -2.25%
- 1M
- -6.37%
- YTD
- -4.50%
- 6M
- -7.48%
- 1Y
- 13.77%
- 3Y*
- 7.43%
- 5Y*
- -6.97%
- 10Y*
- 1.88%
BKEM vs. ECNS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 30.24% | 30.55% | 7.53% | 8.68% | -19.43% | -3.91% | 47.53% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | -4.50% | 36.49% | 5.64% | -23.05% | -24.58% | 2.11% | 42.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between BKEM and ECNS is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2020 | 0.73 |
The correlation between BKEM and ECNS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
BKEM vs. ECNS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BKEM
ECNS
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
BKEM
ECNS
Financial Services
BKEM
ECNS
Consumer Cyclical
BKEM
ECNS
Industrials
BKEM
ECNS
Communication Services
BKEM
ECNS
Basic Materials
BKEM
ECNS
Energy
BKEM
ECNS
Healthcare
BKEM
ECNS
Consumer Defensive
BKEM
ECNS
Utilities
BKEM
ECNS
Real Estate
BKEM
ECNS
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
BKEM vs. ECNS — Risk / Return Rank
BKEM
ECNS
BKEM vs. ECNS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) and iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS). 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.
| BKEM | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.29 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.13 | +0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.39 | 0.76 | +3.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.85 | 1.51 | +15.34 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BKEM | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.95 | 0.66 | +2.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 | -0.24 | +0.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.07 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.75 | 0.02 | +0.73 |
Drawdowns
BKEM vs. ECNS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BKEM drawdown since its inception was -39.48%, smaller than the maximum ECNS drawdown of -63.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKEM and ECNS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BKEM | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.48% | -63.43% | +23.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.11% | -18.08% | +4.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.38% | -31.72% | +13.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.53% | -59.61% | +23.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -63.43% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.95% | -38.52% | +37.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.00% | -29.39% | +13.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.41% | 9.14% | -5.73% |
Volatility
BKEM vs. ECNS - Volatility Comparison
BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a higher volatility of 8.10% compared to iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) at 5.64%. This indicates that BKEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ECNS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BKEM | ECNS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.10% | 5.64% | +2.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.75% | 12.87% | +3.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.46% | 20.92% | -1.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.73% | 29.44% | -10.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.12% | 25.90% | -6.78% |
BKEM vs. ECNS - Expense Ratio Comparison
BKEM has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than ECNS's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
BKEM vs. ECNS - Dividend Comparison
BKEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, less than ECNS's 6.49% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.45% | 2.25% | 2.76% | 3.02% | 3.15% | 2.22% | 1.78% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ECNS iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF | 6.49% | 6.20% | 5.98% | 4.89% | 3.54% | 4.87% | 3.59% | 3.23% | 6.16% | 3.18% | 4.29% | 3.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BKEM and ECNS have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BKEM has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to ECNS (5.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKEM dropped -39.48% vs ECNS's -63.43%.
On 5-year performance, BKEM leads with 7.37% vs -6.97% for ECNS. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, ECNS has been the lower-risk option at 5.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, BKEM has performed better with a 7.37% return vs -6.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for ECNS.
ECNS has the higher dividend yield at 6.49%, compared with 1.45% for BKEM.
BKEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index, while ECNS tracks MSCI China Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: BNY Mellon and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for BKEM and 0.59% for ECNS.
BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 0.66), 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 BKEM and ECNS
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