PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EMAD.L is traded in USD, while BBSU.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the BBSU.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMAD.L achieves a 18.88% return, which is significantly higher than BBSU.L's 8.68% return.


EMAD.L

1D
-2.28%
1M
-11.14%
6M
11.94%
YTD
18.88%
1Y
31.93%
3Y*
20.12%
5Y*
6.07%
10Y*
9.49%

BBSU.L

1D
-1.14%
1M
0.34%
6M
7.82%
YTD
8.68%
1Y
19.27%
3Y*
19.45%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EMAD.L
State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
18.88%32.13%11.12%6.54%-21.75%-6.15%28.24%3.81%
BBSU.L
JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc)
8.68%17.65%25.07%27.08%-20.03%28.08%19.62%13.28%

Correlation

The correlation between EMAD.L and BBSU.L is 0.62, 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

0.62

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

0.56

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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2019

0.60

The correlation between EMAD.L and BBSU.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMAD.L
EMAD.L Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
EMAD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMAD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMAD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
EMAD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMAD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

BBSU.L
BBSU.L Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
BBSU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBSU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L). 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.


EMAD.LBBSU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.29

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.36

2.10

+0.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.96

8.51

-1.55

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMAD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is comparable to the BBSU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMAD.L and BBSU.L, 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

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMAD.L drawdown since its inception was -46.17%, which is greater than BBSU.L's maximum drawdown of -33.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMAD.L and BBSU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMAD.LBBSU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.17%

-33.73%

-12.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.45%

-9.14%

-4.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.03%

-19.51%

-0.52%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.79%

-26.17%

-12.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-13.45%

-1.71%

-11.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.72%

-5.34%

-9.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.58%

2.26%

+2.32%

Volatility

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Volatility Comparison

State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L) has a higher volatility of 9.76% compared to JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Equity UCITS ETF (Acc) (BBSU.L) at 3.40%. This indicates that EMAD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BBSU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMAD.LBBSU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.76%

3.40%

+6.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.25%

8.87%

+12.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.65%

11.74%

+11.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.82%

15.86%

+4.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.16%

17.38%

+2.78%

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMAD.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than BBSU.L's 0.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMAD.L vs. BBSU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EMAD.L nor BBSU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


EMAD.L and BBSU.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, BBSU.L is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

BBSU.L is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAD.L.

EMAD.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while BBSU.L is Large Cap Blend Equities. EMAD.L tracks MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Asia Index, while BBSU.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD. They also come from different issuers: State Street and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EMAD.L and 0.05% for BBSU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMAD.L and BBSU.L

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