CEMA.L vs. PADV.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CEMA.L (iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc) and PADV.L (SPDR S&P Pan Asia Dividend Aristocrats UCITS) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - CEMA.L tracks the MSCI EM Asia Index Net while PADV.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEMA.L returned 11.28%/yr vs 6.98%/yr for PADV.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CEMA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PADV.L.

Performance

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) and SPDR S&P Pan Asia Dividend Aristocrats UCITS (PADV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CEMA.L is traded in USD, while PADV.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the PADV.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEMA.L achieves a 30.23% return, which is significantly higher than PADV.L's 3.39% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMA.L has outperformed PADV.L with an annualized return of 11.28%, while PADV.L has yielded a comparatively lower 6.98% annualized return.

CEMA.L

• 1D: -1.58%
• 1M: 7.24%
• YTD: 30.23%
• 6M: 33.97%
• 1Y: 58.48%
• 3Y*: 26.46%
• 5Y*: 7.99%
• 10Y*: 11.28%

PADV.L

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: -0.34%
• YTD: 3.39%
• 6M: 1.93%
• 1Y: 12.17%
• 3Y*: 13.29%
• 5Y*: 4.11%
• 10Y*: 6.98%

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

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CEMA.L iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc	30.23%	33.97%	12.43%	6.65%	-21.47%	-5.32%	28.23%	17.50%	-15.71%	42.34%
PADV.L SPDR S&P Pan Asia Dividend Aristocrats UCITS	3.39%	23.25%	4.82%	15.37%	-16.05%	2.50%	0.22%	21.46%	-9.19%	29.49%

Correlation

The correlation between CEMA.L and PADV.L is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2013	0.63

The correlation between CEMA.L and PADV.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.69 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CEMA.L	PADV.L
Technology	49.6%	6.7%
Financial Services	13.7%	33.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	6.7%
Industrials	7.2%	7.3%
Communication Services	6.5%	6.2%
Basic Materials	3.4%	2.8%
Healthcare	3.0%	8.7%
Energy	2.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	9.2%
Utilities	1.4%	14.9%
Real Estate	0.7%	4.6%

Return for Risk

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CEMA.L

CEMA.L Risk / Return Rank: 83
CEMA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CEMA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
CEMA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CEMA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CEMA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 81

PADV.L

PADV.L Risk / Return Rank: 33
PADV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
PADV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
PADV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 32
PADV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
PADV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) and SPDR S&P Pan Asia Dividend Aristocrats UCITS (PADV.L). 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.

	CEMA.L	PADV.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.76	0.97	+1.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.67	1.39	+2.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.17	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.23	1.46	+2.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.65	3.98	+11.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEMA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is higher than the PADV.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEMA.L and PADV.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CEMA.L	PADV.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.76	0.97	+1.80
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39	0.27	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.56	0.46	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.40	0.35	+0.05

Drawdowns

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEMA.L drawdown since its inception was -45.51%, which is greater than PADV.L's maximum drawdown of -35.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMA.L and PADV.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CEMA.L	PADV.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.51%	-35.53%	-9.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.77%	-8.27%	-5.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.95%	-14.40%	-5.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.15%	-35.53%	-5.62%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.51%	-35.53%	-9.98%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.89%	-5.24%	+2.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.07%	-8.37%	-6.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.73%	3.04%	+0.69%

Volatility

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) has a higher volatility of 9.50% compared to SPDR S&P Pan Asia Dividend Aristocrats UCITS (PADV.L) at 3.58%. This indicates that CEMA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PADV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CEMA.L	PADV.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.50%	3.58%	+5.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.21%	9.88%	+8.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.09%	12.47%	+8.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.24%	15.37%	+4.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.96%	15.94%	+4.02%

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEMA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than PADV.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

CEMA.L vs. PADV.L - Dividend Comparison

CEMA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PADV.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.89%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CEMA.L iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PADV.L SPDR S&P Pan Asia Dividend Aristocrats UCITS	2.89%	2.96%	3.06%	2.93%	3.44%	2.91%	2.94%	2.79%	2.38%	1.76%	2.14%	3.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CEMA.L and PADV.L in my portfolio?

CEMA.L and PADV.L have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CEMA.L or PADV.L?

On fees, CEMA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CEMA.L or PADV.L?

CEMA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PADV.L.

What is the main difference between CEMA.L and PADV.L?

CEMA.L tracks MSCI EM Asia Index Net, while PADV.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CEMA.L and 0.55% for PADV.L.