EEMA vs. VO

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EEMA (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF) and VO (Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index, while VO is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEMA returned 9.33%/yr vs 11.50%/yr for VO. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. EEMA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VO.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMA achieves a 18.44% return, which is significantly higher than VO's 12.35% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMA has underperformed VO with an annualized return of 9.33%, while VO has yielded a comparatively higher 11.50% 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%

VO

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.55%
• 6M: 10.12%
• YTD: 12.35%
• 1Y: 16.51%
• 3Y*: 14.32%
• 5Y*: 7.77%
• 10Y*: 11.50%
• ALL TIME*: 10.33%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF	$19.41M	$13.70M	$20.34M
VO Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF	$194.51M	$293.72M	$235.90M

EEMA vs. VO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
VO Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF	12.35%	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 have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.59
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	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 0.54 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMA vs. VO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEMA	VO
Technology	40.7%	18.2%
Financial Services	17.0%	13.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	9.0%
Industrials	8.4%	19.9%
Communication Services	6.6%	2.7%
Basic Materials	4.8%	3.9%
Healthcare	3.9%	7.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	4.6%
Energy	2.7%	7.4%
Utilities	1.7%	8.4%
Real Estate	1.0%	5.1%

Return for Risk

EEMA vs. VO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EEMA

EEMA Risk / Return Rank: 63
EEMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
EEMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
EEMA Omega Ratio Rank: 64
EEMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
EEMA Martin Ratio Rank: 62

VO

VO Risk / Return Rank: 51
VO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
VO Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
VO Omega Ratio Rank: 46
VO Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
VO Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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. 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.

	EEMA	VO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	1.18	+0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.99	1.73	+0.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.21	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.43	1.83	+0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.50	6.99	+0.51

EEMA vs. VO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the VO Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEMA	VO	Difference
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	-38.31%	-27.57%	-10.74%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.18%	-39.37%	-4.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.62%	-0.49%	-8.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.88%	-7.81%	-6.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.62%	2.13%	+2.49%

Volatility

EEMA vs. VO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) has a higher volatility of 7.90% compared to Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) at 2.09%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	EEMA	VO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.90%	2.09%	+5.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.26%	9.44%	+11.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.81%	12.61%	+11.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.02%	17.59%	+3.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.12%	18.86%	+2.26%

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 1.39%, more than VO's 1.32% 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%
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

Can I hold both EEMA and VO in my portfolio?

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.

Which is riskier, EEMA or VO?

EEMA has higher volatility (7.90%) compared to VO (2.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMA dropped -44.18% vs VO's -58.87%.

Which ETF is better, EEMA or VO?

On 10-year performance, VO leads with 11.50% vs 9.33% for EEMA. On fees, VO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VO has been the lower-risk option at 2.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEMA or VO?

Over the 10-year period, VO has performed better with a 11.50% return vs 9.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEMA or VO?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EEMA or VO?

EEMA has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 1.32% for VO.

What is the main difference between EEMA and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EEMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 1.18), 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.