EEMA vs. SBIT
EEMA (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF) and SBIT (Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index, while SBIT is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Bitcoin Index (-200%). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EEMA returned 36.15% vs 98.77% for SBIT. Their -0.37 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. EEMA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for SBIT.
Performance
EEMA vs. SBIT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEMA achieves a 18.44% return, which is significantly lower than SBIT's 39.44% 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%
SBIT
- 1D
- 5.60%
- 1M
- -6.04%
- 6M
- 32.41%
- YTD
- 39.44%
- 1Y
- 98.77%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -42.65%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $19.41M | $13.70M | $20.34M | |
| $29.57M | $32.71M | $46.48M |
EEMA vs. SBIT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF | 18.44% | 33.27% | 6.49% |
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF | 39.44% | -25.11% | -73.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEMA and SBIT is -0.47, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024 | -0.37 |
The correlation between EEMA and SBIT shifts across timeframes, from -0.47 (1 year) to -0.37 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. SBIT — Risk / Return Rank
EEMA
SBIT
EEMA vs. SBIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF (SBIT). 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 | SBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.19 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.23 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.43 | 2.35 | +0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.50 | 5.19 | +2.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EEMA vs. SBIT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMA drawdown since its inception was -44.18%, smaller than the maximum SBIT drawdown of -91.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMA and SBIT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEMA | SBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.18% | -91.35% | +47.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.30% | -47.94% | +33.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.23% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.62% | -77.87% | +69.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.88% | -69.07% | +55.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.62% | 21.67% | -17.05% |
Volatility
EEMA vs. SBIT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) is 7.90%, while Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF (SBIT) has a volatility of 18.09%. This indicates that EEMA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SBIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEMA | SBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.90% | 18.09% | -10.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.26% | 67.10% | -45.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.81% | 88.65% | -64.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.02% | 96.10% | -75.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.12% | 96.10% | -74.98% |
EEMA vs. SBIT - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEMA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than SBIT's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
EEMA vs. SBIT - Dividend Comparison
EEMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, less than SBIT's 4.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SBIT Proshares Ultrashort Bitcoin ETF | 4.03% | 0.52% | 1.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EEMA and SBIT have a correlation of -0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SBIT has higher volatility (18.09%) compared to EEMA (7.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMA dropped -44.18% vs SBIT's -91.35%.
On 1-year performance, SBIT leads with 98.77% vs 36.15% for EEMA. On fees, EEMA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. 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 1-year period, SBIT has performed better with a 98.77% return vs 36.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EEMA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for SBIT.
SBIT has the higher dividend yield at 4.03%, compared with 1.39% for EEMA.
EEMA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while SBIT is Cryptocurrency. EEMA tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index, while SBIT tracks Bloomberg Bitcoin Index (-200%). They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EEMA and 0.95% for SBIT.
EEMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 1.27), 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 SBIT
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