PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEMV vs. ASEA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEMV vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMV achieves a 17.74% return, which is significantly higher than ASEA's 9.50% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMV has underperformed ASEA with an annualized return of 6.68%, while ASEA has yielded a comparatively higher 7.64% annualized return.


EEMV

1D
-1.04%
1M
7.00%
YTD
17.74%
6M
18.90%
1Y
26.57%
3Y*
14.14%
5Y*
5.59%
10Y*
6.68%

ASEA

1D
-0.69%
1M
3.21%
YTD
9.50%
6M
12.22%
1Y
26.01%
3Y*
14.54%
5Y*
9.70%
10Y*
7.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEMV vs. ASEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEMV
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF
17.74%13.45%7.98%7.75%-13.94%5.05%6.90%7.83%-5.81%27.28%
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
9.50%19.80%9.82%4.88%5.24%4.66%-7.88%8.34%-7.58%35.06%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMV and ASEA is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.66

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

0.68

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

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2011

0.72

The correlation between EEMV and ASEA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMV vs. ASEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EEMV
ASEA

Technology

28.9%

-

Financial Services

17.7%
58.6%

Communication Services

11.2%
8.8%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
2.2%

Industrials

6.7%
15.4%

Healthcare

6.2%
2.3%

Consumer Cyclical

5.0%

-

Utilities

4.6%
4.4%

Energy

3.4%
3.5%

Basic Materials

3.1%
2.1%

Real Estate

0.5%
2.8%

Technology

EEMV
28.9%
ASEA

-

Financial Services

EEMV
17.7%
ASEA
58.6%

Communication Services

EEMV
11.2%
ASEA
8.8%

Consumer Defensive

EEMV
6.8%
ASEA
2.2%

Industrials

EEMV
6.7%
ASEA
15.4%

Healthcare

EEMV
6.2%
ASEA
2.3%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMV
5.0%
ASEA

-

Utilities

EEMV
4.6%
ASEA
4.4%

Energy

EEMV
3.4%
ASEA
3.5%

Basic Materials

EEMV
3.1%
ASEA
2.1%

Real Estate

EEMV
0.5%
ASEA
2.8%

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

EEMV vs. ASEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMV
EEMV Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
EEMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMV Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMV Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

ASEA
ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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.

EEMV vs. ASEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). 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.


EEMVASEADifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.04

1.87

+0.17

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.89

2.74

+0.15

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.34

+0.07

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.89

3.16

-0.26

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

10.79

8.72

+2.07

EEMV vs. ASEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMV Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the ASEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMV and ASEA, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EEMVASEADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.04

1.87

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.67

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

0.44

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.27

+0.12

Drawdowns

EEMV vs. ASEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMV drawdown since its inception was -31.56%, smaller than the maximum ASEA drawdown of -44.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMV and ASEA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEMVASEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.56%

-44.16%

+12.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.22%

-8.28%

-0.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.47%

-22.20%

+9.73%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.90%

-22.20%

+0.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.56%

-44.16%

+12.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.08%

-2.81%

+1.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.97%

-10.66%

+2.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.47%

2.99%

-0.52%

Volatility

EEMV vs. ASEA - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) has a higher volatility of 5.78% compared to Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) at 3.40%. This indicates that EEMV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EEMVASEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.78%

3.40%

+2.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.71%

11.20%

+0.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.06%

14.01%

-0.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.85%

14.66%

-2.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.86%

17.59%

-3.73%

EEMV vs. ASEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ASEA's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEMV vs. ASEA - Dividend Comparison

EEMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, less than ASEA's 3.61% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
3.61%3.95%3.61%3.76%2.23%4.19%2.27%2.51%3.08%1.59%2.78%3.64%
EEMV
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF
2.25%2.65%3.50%2.75%1.93%2.14%2.45%2.63%2.46%2.34%2.79%2.55%

Frequently Asked Questions


EEMV and ASEA have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EEMV has higher volatility (5.78%) compared to ASEA (3.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMV dropped -31.56% vs ASEA's -44.16%.

On 10-year performance, ASEA leads with 7.64% vs 6.68% for EEMV. On fees, EEMV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ASEA has performed better with a 7.64% return vs 6.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EEMV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA has the higher dividend yield at 3.61%, compared with 2.25% for EEMV.

EEMV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EEMV and 0.65% for ASEA.

EEMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.87), 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 EEMV and ASEA

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