PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEMA vs. VO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEMA vs. VO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO). 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 22.74% return, which is significantly higher than VO's 12.33% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMA has underperformed VO with an annualized return of 9.91%, while VO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.48% annualized return.


EEMA

1D
0.15%
1M
-0.78%
6M
17.70%
YTD
22.74%
1Y
41.10%
3Y*
22.19%
5Y*
7.06%
10Y*
9.91%

VO

1D
0.20%
1M
1.73%
6M
9.16%
YTD
12.33%
1Y
16.38%
3Y*
14.87%
5Y*
7.86%
10Y*
11.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEMA vs. VO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEMA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
22.74%33.27%10.23%6.57%-21.49%-4.22%25.17%18.60%-15.76%43.41%
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF
12.33%11.62%15.31%16.03%-18.73%24.70%18.10%30.98%-9.24%19.28%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMA and VO is 0.59, 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

0.55

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

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

0.62

The correlation between EEMA and VO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMA vs. VO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EEMA
VO

Technology

43.4%
21.7%

Financial Services

15.3%
12.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.4%
8.6%

Industrials

8.4%
17.3%

Communication Services

6.6%
2.2%

Basic Materials

4.4%
4.4%

Healthcare

3.5%
7.5%

Energy

2.8%
7.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
4.7%

Utilities

1.7%
7.9%

Real Estate

0.9%
5.1%

Technology

EEMA
43.4%
VO
21.7%

Financial Services

EEMA
15.3%
VO
12.5%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMA
10.4%
VO
8.6%

Industrials

EEMA
8.4%
VO
17.3%

Communication Services

EEMA
6.6%
VO
2.2%

Basic Materials

EEMA
4.4%
VO
4.4%

Healthcare

EEMA
3.5%
VO
7.5%

Energy

EEMA
2.8%
VO
7.9%

Consumer Defensive

EEMA
2.6%
VO
4.7%

Utilities

EEMA
1.7%
VO
7.9%

Real Estate

EEMA
0.9%
VO
5.1%

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. VO — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMA
EEMA Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
EEMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMA Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMA Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

VO
VO Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
VO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
VO Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
VO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
VO Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EEMA vs. VO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) and Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO). 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.


EEMAVODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.22

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.86

1.92

+0.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.94

7.24

+2.70

EEMA vs. VO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is higher than the VO Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMA and VO, 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. VO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMA drawdown since its inception was -44.18%, smaller than the maximum VO drawdown of -58.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMA and VO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEMAVODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.18%

-58.87%

+14.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.30%

-8.17%

-6.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.23%

-19.02%

-1.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.81%

-27.57%

-11.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.18%

-39.37%

-4.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.31%

0.00%

-5.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.91%

-7.83%

-6.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.12%

2.16%

+1.96%

Volatility

EEMA vs. VO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) has a higher volatility of 9.60% compared to Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) at 3.81%. This indicates that EEMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EEMAVODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.60%

3.81%

+5.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.45%

9.62%

+10.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.94%

12.74%

+10.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.93%

17.64%

+3.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.03%

18.87%

+2.16%

EEMA vs. VO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than VO's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEMA vs. VO - Dividend Comparison

EEMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.34%, more than VO's 1.32% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEMA
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
1.34%1.48%1.74%2.02%1.78%2.19%1.15%1.86%2.17%1.74%1.74%2.44%
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF
1.32%1.52%1.49%1.52%1.60%1.12%1.45%1.48%1.82%1.35%1.45%1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


EEMA and VO have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EEMA has higher volatility (9.60%) compared to VO (3.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMA dropped -44.18% vs VO's -58.87%.

On 10-year performance, VO leads with 11.48% vs 9.91% for EEMA. On fees, VO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VO has been the lower-risk option at 3.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VO has performed better with a 11.48% return vs 9.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EEMA.

EEMA has the higher dividend yield at 1.34%, compared with 1.32% for VO.

EEMA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while VO is Mid Cap Blend Equities. EEMA tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index, while VO tracks CRSP US Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EEMA and 0.03% for VO.

EEMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 1.23), 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 VO

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