EMAS.L vs. ASEA

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA).

EMAS.L and ASEA are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. EMAS.L is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. It was launched on May 13, 2011. ASEA is a passively managed fund by Global X that tracks the performance of the FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. It was launched on Feb 17, 2011. Both EMAS.L and ASEA are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMAS.L SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF	7.02%	22.99%	12.85%	0.63%	-12.26%	-4.94%	23.72%	13.21%	-9.79%	29.84%
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	8.59%	11.27%	11.73%	-0.36%	17.75%	5.65%	-10.59%	4.22%	-2.09%	23.38%

Different Trading Currencies

EMAS.L is traded in GBP, while ASEA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the ASEA values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMAS.L achieves a 7.02% return, which is significantly lower than ASEA's 8.59% return. Over the past 10 years, EMAS.L has outperformed ASEA with an annualized return of 9.50%, while ASEA has yielded a comparatively lower 7.76% annualized return.

EMAS.L

• 1D: 3.53%
• 1M: -6.40%
• YTD: 7.02%
• 6M: 9.07%
• 1Y: 30.98%
• 3Y*: 13.32%
• 5Y*: 3.91%
• 10Y*: 9.50%

ASEA

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: -0.04%
• YTD: 8.59%
• 6M: 18.20%
• 1Y: 26.72%
• 3Y*: 10.63%
• 5Y*: 10.65%
• 10Y*: 7.76%

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

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMAS.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than ASEA's 0.65% expense ratio.

ASEA

Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF

EMAS.L

SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF

Return for Risk

EMAS.L vs. ASEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMAS.L

EMAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 81
EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
EMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
EMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 80
EMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
EMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

ASEA

ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 85
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 85
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) 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.

	EMAS.L	ASEA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	1.66	+0.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.38	-0.21
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.34	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.78	2.41	+0.37
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.88	10.42	-1.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the ASEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMAS.L and ASEA, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMAS.L	ASEA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.66	1.66	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22	0.83	-0.60
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	0.46	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	0.36	+0.08

Correlation

The correlation between EMAS.L and ASEA is 0.51, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Dividend Comparison

EMAS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ASEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.70%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMAS.L SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	3.70%	3.95%	3.61%	3.76%	2.23%	4.19%	2.27%	2.51%	3.08%	1.59%	2.78%	3.64%

Drawdowns

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -34.79%, smaller than the maximum ASEA drawdown of -37.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMAS.L and ASEA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMAS.L	ASEA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.79%	-44.16%	+9.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.49%	-12.51%	+0.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.16%	-22.20%	-6.96%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.79%	-44.16%	+9.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.00%	-5.18%	-2.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.81%	-10.73%	-1.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	2.77%	+0.71%

Volatility

EMAS.L vs. ASEA - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) has a higher volatility of 7.39% compared to Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) at 5.61%. This indicates that EMAS.L'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.

Volatility by Period

	EMAS.L	ASEA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.39%	5.61%	+1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.64%	9.66%	+3.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.55%	16.21%	+2.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.39%	12.91%	+4.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.30%	16.91%	+1.39%