EMEQ vs. AIA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMEQ is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Nomura, while AIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia 50 Index. EMEQ is actively managed, while AIA is passively managed. Over the past year, EMEQ returned 148.00% vs 80.75% for AIA. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMEQ charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AIA.

Performance

EMEQ vs. AIA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMEQ achieves a 77.86% return, which is significantly higher than AIA's 43.04% return.

EMEQ

• 1D: -8.46%
• 1M: 12.67%
• YTD: 77.86%
• 6M: 84.70%
• 1Y: 148.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AIA

• 1D: -7.46%
• 1M: 3.93%
• YTD: 43.04%
• 6M: 46.22%
• 1Y: 80.75%
• 3Y*: 36.18%
• 5Y*: 11.29%
• 10Y*: 14.96%

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

EMEQ vs. AIA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	77.86%	69.78%	-0.73%
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	43.04%	47.79%	6.33%

Correlation

The correlation between EMEQ and AIA is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.92

The correlation between EMEQ and AIA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMEQ vs. AIA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMEQ	AIA
Financial Services	6.8%	16.4%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	-
Communication Services	2.4%	7.4%
Healthcare	1.4%	0.8%
Basic Materials	1.3%	-
Energy	1.3%	0.6%
Technology	1.1%	63.8%
Utilities	0.9%	-
Industrials	0.3%	2.0%
Real Estate	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

EMEQ vs. AIA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 94
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 93
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 96

AIA

AIA Risk / Return Rank: 86
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

EMEQ vs. AIA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). 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.

	EMEQ	AIA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.98	2.75	+1.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.00	3.20	+0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.48	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.31	5.74	+2.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	30.81	19.64	+11.17

EMEQ vs. AIA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMEQ Sharpe Ratio is 3.98, which is higher than the AIA Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMEQ and AIA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMEQ vs. AIA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMEQ drawdown since its inception was -19.99%, smaller than the maximum AIA drawdown of -60.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMEQ and AIA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMEQ	AIA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.99%	-60.89%	+40.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.91%	-14.15%	-3.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.64%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-50.11%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-54.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.46%	-7.46%	-1.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.03%	-16.64%	+12.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.82%	4.13%	+0.69%

Volatility

EMEQ vs. AIA - Volatility Comparison

Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a higher volatility of 21.89% compared to iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) at 16.92%. This indicates that EMEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMEQ	AIA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.89%	16.92%	+4.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.54%	26.32%	+8.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.38%	29.51%	+7.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	32.96%	26.34%	+6.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	32.96%	23.93%	+9.03%

EMEQ vs. AIA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMEQ has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is higher than AIA's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMEQ vs. AIA - Dividend Comparison

EMEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, which matches AIA's 1.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	1.54%	2.50%	2.78%	2.07%	2.59%	1.54%	1.11%	2.24%	2.49%	1.45%	2.29%	2.88%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.55%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMEQ and AIA in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, EMEQ and AIA move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EMEQ or AIA?

EMEQ has higher volatility (21.89%) compared to AIA (16.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMEQ dropped -19.99% vs AIA's -60.89%.

Which ETF is better, EMEQ or AIA?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 148.00% vs 80.75% for AIA. On fees, AIA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, AIA has been the lower-risk option at 16.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMEQ or AIA?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 148.00% return vs 80.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMEQ or AIA?

AIA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMEQ or AIA?

EMEQ and AIA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.55%.

What is the main difference between EMEQ and AIA?

EMEQ is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while AIA is Asia Pacific Equities. They also come from different issuers: Nomura and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.86% for EMEQ and 0.50% for AIA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 vs 2.75), 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.