EEMA vs. EWS
EEMA (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF) and EWS (iShares MSCI Singapore ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds from iShares - EEMA tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index while EWS tracks the MSCI Singapore Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEMA returned 11.30%/yr vs 8.40%/yr for EWS. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.
Performance
EEMA vs. EWS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEMA achieves a 29.62% return, which is significantly higher than EWS's 10.24% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMA has outperformed EWS with an annualized return of 11.30%, while EWS has yielded a comparatively lower 8.40% annualized return.
EEMA
- 1D
- 0.76%
- 1M
- 7.84%
- YTD
- 29.62%
- 6M
- 31.87%
- 1Y
- 55.09%
- 3Y*
- 25.38%
- 5Y*
- 7.89%
- 10Y*
- 11.30%
EWS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 2.91%
- YTD
- 10.24%
- 6M
- 10.76%
- 1Y
- 23.81%
- 3Y*
- 22.84%
- 5Y*
- 10.58%
- 10Y*
- 8.40%
EEMA vs. EWS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF | 29.62% | 33.27% | 10.23% | 6.57% | -21.49% | -4.22% | 25.17% | 18.60% | -15.76% | 43.41% |
EWS iShares MSCI Singapore ETF | 10.24% | 31.35% | 22.10% | 6.15% | -9.80% | 5.47% | -8.47% | 14.54% | -11.34% | 34.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEMA and EWS is 0.58, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2012 | 0.69 |
The correlation between EEMA and EWS shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (1 year) to 0.69 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
EEMA vs. EWS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EEMA
EWS
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
-
Healthcare
-
Energy
-
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
EEMA
EWS
Financial Services
EEMA
EWS
Consumer Cyclical
EEMA
EWS
Industrials
EEMA
EWS
Communication Services
EEMA
EWS
Basic Materials
EEMA
EWS
-
Healthcare
EEMA
EWS
-
Energy
EEMA
EWS
-
Consumer Defensive
EEMA
EWS
Utilities
EEMA
EWS
Real Estate
EEMA
EWS
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
EEMA vs. EWS — Risk / Return Rank
EEMA
EWS
EEMA vs. EWS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (EWS). 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.
| EEMA | EWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.95 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 1.28 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.87 | 3.06 | +0.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.07 | 7.38 | +6.69 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EEMA vs. EWS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMA drawdown since its inception was -44.18%, smaller than the maximum EWS drawdown of -75.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMA and EWS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEMA | EWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.18% | -75.13% | +30.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.30% | -7.82% | -6.48% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.23% | -16.34% | -3.89% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -40.46% | -29.06% | -11.40% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.18% | -40.84% | -3.34% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.94% | -21.97% | +8.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.93% | 3.23% | +0.70% |
Volatility
EEMA vs. EWS - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) has a higher volatility of 10.29% compared to iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (EWS) at 5.10%. This indicates that EEMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EWS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEMA | EWS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.29% | 5.10% | +5.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.37% | 12.16% | +7.21% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.05% | 15.30% | +6.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.75% | 17.32% | +3.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.03% | 18.05% | +2.98% |
EEMA vs. EWS - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both EEMA and EWS have an expense ratio of 0.50%.
Dividends
EEMA vs. EWS - Dividend Comparison
EEMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%, less than EWS's 3.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF | 1.27% | 1.48% | 1.74% | 2.02% | 1.78% | 2.19% | 1.15% | 1.86% | 2.17% | 1.74% | 1.74% | 2.44% |
EWS iShares MSCI Singapore ETF | 3.98% | 4.10% | 4.28% | 6.50% | 2.56% | 6.00% | 2.68% | 4.70% | 4.21% | 3.46% | 3.96% | 4.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EEMA and EWS have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EEMA has higher volatility (10.29%) compared to EWS (5.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMA dropped -44.18% vs EWS's -75.13%.
On 10-year performance, EEMA leads with 11.30% vs 8.40% for EWS. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, EWS has been the lower-risk option at 5.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EEMA has performed better with a 11.30% return vs 8.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EEMA and EWS have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.
EWS has the higher dividend yield at 3.98%, compared with 1.27% for EEMA.
EEMA tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index, while EWS tracks MSCI Singapore Index.
EEMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 1.57), 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 EEMA and EWS
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