PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) and Amundi Index MSCI Pacific ex Japan SRI PAB UCITS ETF DR GBP (D) (MPXG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EMAS.L is traded in GBP, while MPXG.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the MPXG.L 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 81.21% return, which is significantly higher than MPXG.L's 2.88% return.


EMAS.L

1D
38.70%
1M
51.83%
YTD
81.21%
6M
83.22%
1Y
120.08%
3Y*
35.88%
5Y*
15.70%
10Y*
15.67%

MPXG.L

1D
-0.35%
1M
-2.75%
YTD
2.88%
6M
2.63%
1Y
5.29%
3Y*
4.17%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
EMAS.L
SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF
81.21%22.99%12.85%0.63%0.44%
MPXG.L
Amundi Index MSCI Pacific ex Japan SRI PAB UCITS ETF DR GBP (D)
2.88%5.53%2.02%-1.23%1.81%

Correlation

The correlation between EMAS.L and MPXG.L is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

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

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2022

0.42

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

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L — 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: 9595
Overall Rank
EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

MPXG.L
MPXG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
MPXG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MPXG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
MPXG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
MPXG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
MPXG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) and Amundi Index MSCI Pacific ex Japan SRI PAB UCITS ETF DR GBP (D) (MPXG.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.


EMAS.LMPXG.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+6.69

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.09

1.09

+0.99

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

10.86

0.74

+10.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

35.47

1.90

+33.57

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is higher than the MPXG.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMAS.L and MPXG.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMAS.LMPXG.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85

0.48

+2.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.71

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.28

+0.30

Drawdowns

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMAS.L drawdown since its inception was -34.79%, which is greater than MPXG.L's maximum drawdown of -16.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMAS.L and MPXG.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMAS.LMPXG.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.79%

-16.94%

-17.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.14%

-7.42%

-3.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.88%

-15.75%

-2.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.16%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-5.39%

+5.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.69%

-5.30%

-6.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.42%

2.84%

+0.58%

Volatility

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) has a higher volatility of 33.13% compared to Amundi Index MSCI Pacific ex Japan SRI PAB UCITS ETF DR GBP (D) (MPXG.L) at 3.74%. This indicates that EMAS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MPXG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMAS.LMPXG.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

33.13%

3.74%

+29.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

35.88%

9.14%

+26.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

42.40%

11.41%

+30.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.78%

14.91%

+9.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.18%

14.91%

+7.27%

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMAS.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than MPXG.L's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMAS.L vs. MPXG.L - Dividend Comparison

EMAS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MPXG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.15%.


PositionTTM202520242023
EMAS.L
SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MPXG.L
Amundi Index MSCI Pacific ex Japan SRI PAB UCITS ETF DR GBP (D)
3.15%3.24%3.36%3.87%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMAS.L and MPXG.L have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MPXG.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MPXG.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAS.L.

EMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while MPXG.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EMAS.L and 0.15% for MPXG.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMAS.L and MPXG.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