EEMA vs. GXC
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC).
EEMA and GXC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. EEMA is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index. It was launched on Feb 8, 2012. GXC is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the S&P China BMI Index. It was launched on Mar 19, 2007. Both EEMA and GXC are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: EEMA or GXC.
Performance
EEMA vs. GXC - Performance Comparison
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEMA achieves a 12.55% return, which is significantly lower than GXC's 15.37% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMA has outperformed GXC with an annualized return of 4.19%, while GXC has yielded a comparatively lower 1.74% annualized return.
EEMA
12.55%
-5.91%
1.63%
17.05%
3.85%
4.19%
GXC
15.37%
-3.83%
2.85%
12.43%
-1.98%
1.74%
Key characteristics
| EEMA | GXC | |
|---|---|---|
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.96 | 0.44 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.45 | 0.85 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.18 | 1.11 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.50 | 0.23 |
| Martin Ratio | 4.58 | 1.28 |
| Ulcer Index | 3.71% | 10.35% |
| Daily Std Dev | 17.84% | 30.38% |
| Max Drawdown | -44.19% | -72.16% |
| Current Drawdown | -20.54% | -45.60% |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
EEMA vs. GXC - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEMA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GXC's 0.59% expense ratio.
Correlation
The correlation between EEMA and GXC is 0.86, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
EEMA vs. GXC - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC). 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.
Dividends
EEMA vs. GXC - Dividend Comparison
EEMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than GXC's 2.97% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF | 1.92% | 2.25% | 1.78% | 2.19% | 1.15% | 1.86% | 2.17% | 1.73% | 1.74% | 2.44% | 1.33% | 2.42% |
GXC SPDR S&P China ETF | 2.97% | 3.70% | 2.67% | 1.35% | 1.04% | 1.60% | 2.03% | 1.84% | 2.05% | 2.85% | 2.11% | 2.29% |
Drawdowns
EEMA vs. GXC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMA drawdown since its inception was -44.19%, smaller than the maximum GXC drawdown of -72.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMA and GXC. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
EEMA vs. GXC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) is 5.74%, while SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) has a volatility of 9.41%. This indicates that EEMA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.