EEMV vs. ASIA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EEMV (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF) and ASIA (Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds. EEMV is passively managed, while ASIA is actively managed. Over the past year, EEMV returned 26.57% vs 66.09% for ASIA. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EEMV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for ASIA.

Performance

EEMV vs. ASIA - 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 Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMV achieves a 17.74% return, which is significantly lower than ASIA's 33.47% 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%

ASIA

• 1D: -1.35%
• 1M: 11.70%
• YTD: 33.47%
• 6M: 38.00%
• 1Y: 66.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EEMV vs. ASIA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF	17.74%	13.45%	7.98%	5.24%
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF	33.47%	32.06%	3.41%	0.01%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMV and ASIA is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2023	0.83

The correlation between EEMV and ASIA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMV vs. ASIA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEMV	ASIA
Technology	28.9%	46.6%
Financial Services	17.7%	17.6%
Communication Services	11.2%	5.1%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	1.1%
Industrials	6.7%	11.6%
Healthcare	6.2%	4.0%
Consumer Cyclical	5.0%	7.5%
Utilities	4.6%	-
Energy	3.4%	2.1%
Basic Materials	3.1%	2.5%
Real Estate	0.5%	2.9%

Return for Risk

EEMV vs. ASIA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMV

EEMV Risk / Return Rank: 61
EEMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
EEMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
EEMV Omega Ratio Rank: 66
EEMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
EEMV Martin Ratio Rank: 60

ASIA

ASIA Risk / Return Rank: 86
ASIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
ASIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
ASIA Omega Ratio Rank: 88
ASIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
ASIA Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. ASIA - 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 Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA). 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.

	EEMV	ASIA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	3.08	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	3.78	-0.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.55	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.89	4.59	-1.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.79	17.09	-6.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EEMV vs. ASIA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMV Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is lower than the ASIA Sharpe Ratio of 3.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMV and ASIA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EEMV	ASIA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	3.08	-1.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.48	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.39	1.24	-0.85

Drawdowns

EEMV vs. ASIA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMV drawdown since its inception was -31.56%, which is greater than ASIA's maximum drawdown of -23.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMV and ASIA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEMV	ASIA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.56%	-23.95%	-7.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.22%	-14.47%	+5.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.47%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.90%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.08%	-1.35%	+0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.97%	-4.85%	-3.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.47%	3.88%	-1.41%

Volatility

EEMV vs. ASIA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) is 5.78%, while Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF (ASIA) has a volatility of 9.93%. This indicates that EEMV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EEMV	ASIA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.78%	9.93%	-4.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.71%	18.57%	-6.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.06%	21.56%	-8.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.85%	20.24%	-8.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.86%	20.24%	-6.38%

EEMV vs. ASIA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ASIA's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEMV vs. ASIA - Dividend Comparison

EEMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, more than ASIA's 0.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASIA Matthews Pacific Tiger Active ETF	0.78%	1.05%	0.58%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both EEMV and ASIA in my portfolio?

EEMV and ASIA have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EEMV or ASIA?

ASIA has higher volatility (9.93%) compared to EEMV (5.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMV dropped -31.56% vs ASIA's -23.95%.

Which ETF is better, EEMV or ASIA?

On 1-year performance, ASIA leads with 66.09% vs 26.57% for EEMV. On fees, EEMV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EEMV has been the lower-risk option at 5.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEMV or ASIA?

Over the 1-year period, ASIA has performed better with a 66.09% return vs 26.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEMV or ASIA?

EEMV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for ASIA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EEMV or ASIA?

EEMV has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 0.78% for ASIA.

What is the main difference between EEMV and ASIA?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EEMV and 0.79% for ASIA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.08 vs 2.04), 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.