PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EEMA vs. AIA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EEMA vs. AIA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

EEMA (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF) and AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds from iShares - EEMA tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index while AIA tracks the S&P Asia 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEMA returned 9.33%/yr vs 13.37%/yr for AIA. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

EEMA vs. AIA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMA achieves a 18.44% return, which is significantly lower than AIA's 37.37% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMA has underperformed AIA with an annualized return of 9.33%, while AIA has yielded a comparatively higher 13.37% annualized return.

EEMA

1D
0.83%
1M
-2.07%
6M
10.69%
YTD
18.44%
1Y
36.15%
3Y*
19.22%
5Y*
7.24%
10Y*
9.33%
ALL TIME*
6.88%

AIA

1D
1.38%
1M
-0.63%
6M
22.48%
YTD
37.37%
1Y
66.32%
3Y*
32.09%
5Y*
12.22%
10Y*
13.37%
ALL TIME*
7.82%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

AIA

iShares Asia 50 ETF
$72.11M$68.43M$74.19M

EEMA

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
$19.41M$13.70M$20.34M

EEMA vs. AIA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEMA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF		18.44%33.27%10.23%6.57%-21.49%-4.22%25.17%18.60%-15.76%43.41%
AIA
iShares Asia 50 ETF		37.37%47.79%20.26%4.32%-24.08%-10.91%33.73%22.21%-14.22%45.00%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMA and AIA is 0.96 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.96

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.94

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.95

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2012

0.92

The correlation between EEMA and AIA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMA vs. AIA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EEMA
AIA

Technology

40.7%
57.5%

Financial Services

17.0%
20.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
9.5%

Industrials

8.4%
2.0%

Communication Services

6.6%
7.2%

Basic Materials

4.8%
0.5%

Healthcare

3.9%
0.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%

-

Energy

2.7%
0.6%

Utilities

1.7%

-

Real Estate

1.0%
0.5%

Technology

EEMA
40.7%
AIA
57.5%

Financial Services

EEMA
17.0%
AIA
20.6%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMA
9.9%
AIA
9.5%

Industrials

EEMA
8.4%
AIA
2.0%

Communication Services

EEMA
6.6%
AIA
7.2%

Basic Materials

EEMA
4.8%
AIA
0.5%

Healthcare

EEMA
3.9%
AIA
0.9%

Consumer Defensive

EEMA
2.8%
AIA

-

Energy

EEMA
2.7%
AIA
0.6%

Utilities

EEMA
1.7%
AIA

-

Real Estate

EEMA
1.0%
AIA
0.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF

iShares Asia 50 ETF

Often compared with EEMA:
EEMA vs. GMFEEMA vs. VFEM.LEEMA vs. MATFXEEMA vs. VAPX.ASEEMA vs. GXCEEMA vs. MCHIEEMA vs. EET
Often compared with AIA:
AIA vs. VPLAIA vs. SPYAIA vs. IOOAIA vs. IEMGAIA vs. GMFAIA vs. VWOAIA vs. EPP

Return for Risk

EEMA vs. AIA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
EEMA
EEMA Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
EEMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMA Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMA Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank
AIA
AIA Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EEMA vs. AIA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). 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.

EEMAAIADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.46
2.03

-0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.99
2.52

-0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.35

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.43

3.81

-1.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.50

12.04

-4.53

EEMA vs. AIA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the AIA Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMA and AIA, 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...

Drawdowns

EEMA vs. AIA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMA drawdown since its inception was -44.18%, smaller than the maximum AIA drawdown of -60.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMA and AIA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EEMAAIADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.18%

-60.89%

+16.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.30%

-16.83%

+2.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.23%

-21.64%

+1.41%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.31%

-45.99%

+7.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.18%

-54.64%

+10.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.62%

-11.13%

+2.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.88%

-16.61%

+2.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.62%

5.32%

-0.70%

Volatility

EEMA vs. AIA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) is 7.90%, while iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a volatility of 11.50%. This indicates that EEMA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EEMAAIADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.90%

11.50%

-3.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.26%

28.26%

-7.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.81%

31.64%

-7.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.02%

26.69%

-5.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.12%

24.17%

-3.05%

EEMA vs. AIA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both EEMA and AIA have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

EEMA vs. AIA - Dividend Comparison

EEMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, less than AIA's 1.60% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AIA
iShares Asia 50 ETF		1.60%2.50%2.78%2.07%2.59%1.54%1.11%2.24%2.49%1.45%2.29%2.88%
EEMA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF		1.39%1.48%1.74%2.02%1.78%2.19%1.15%1.86%2.17%1.74%1.74%2.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.96, EEMA and AIA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

AIA has higher volatility (11.50%) compared to EEMA (7.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMA dropped -44.18% vs AIA's -60.89%.

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 13.37% vs 9.33% for EEMA. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, EEMA has been the lower-risk option at 7.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AIA has performed better with a 13.37% return vs 9.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EEMA and AIA have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

AIA has the higher dividend yield at 1.60%, compared with 1.39% for EEMA.

EEMA tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index, while AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index.

AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.46), 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 EEMA and AIA

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