EPP vs. ASHR
EPP (iShares MSCI Pacific ex Japan ETF) and ASHR (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EPP is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific ex-Japan Index, while ASHR is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 300 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EPP returned 7.03%/yr vs 4.74%/yr for ASHR. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EPP charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASHR.
Performance
EPP vs. ASHR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EPP achieves a 9.21% return, which is significantly higher than ASHR's 5.02% return. Over the past 10 years, EPP has outperformed ASHR with an annualized return of 7.03%, while ASHR has yielded a comparatively lower 4.74% annualized return.
EPP
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- 0.54%
- 6M
- 6.84%
- YTD
- 9.21%
- 1Y
- 13.54%
- 3Y*
- 11.81%
- 5Y*
- 5.26%
- 10Y*
- 7.03%
ASHR
- 1D
- -2.49%
- 1M
- -2.29%
- 6M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 5.02%
- 1Y
- 25.58%
- 3Y*
- 10.02%
- 5Y*
- -1.22%
- 10Y*
- 4.74%
EPP vs. ASHR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EPP iShares MSCI Pacific ex Japan ETF | 9.21% | 19.70% | 4.76% | 5.76% | -6.59% | 4.26% | 6.04% | 18.30% | -10.78% | 26.05% |
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 5.02% | 27.02% | 11.95% | -12.52% | -27.52% | -1.57% | 36.29% | 36.50% | -28.45% | 33.47% |
Correlation
The correlation between EPP and ASHR 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 | 0.48 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2013 | 0.52 |
The correlation between EPP and ASHR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
EPP vs. ASHR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EPP
ASHR
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Communication Services
Technology
Financial Services
EPP
ASHR
Basic Materials
EPP
ASHR
Industrials
EPP
ASHR
Real Estate
EPP
ASHR
Consumer Cyclical
EPP
ASHR
Utilities
EPP
ASHR
Healthcare
EPP
ASHR
Consumer Defensive
EPP
ASHR
Energy
EPP
ASHR
Communication Services
EPP
ASHR
Technology
EPP
ASHR
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
EPP vs. ASHR — Risk / Return Rank
EPP
ASHR
EPP vs. ASHR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Pacific ex Japan ETF (EPP) and Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR). 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.
| EPP | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.24 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 3.34 | -1.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.30 | 9.00 | -4.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EPP vs. ASHR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EPP drawdown since its inception was -66.01%, which is greater than ASHR's maximum drawdown of -51.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EPP and ASHR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EPP | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.01% | -51.30% | -14.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.79% | -7.69% | -1.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.29% | -33.12% | +13.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.55% | -44.10% | +19.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.30% | -51.30% | +12.00% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.11% | -19.53% | +16.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.59% | -29.07% | +18.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.15% | 2.85% | +0.30% |
Volatility
EPP vs. ASHR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Pacific ex Japan ETF (EPP) is 3.96%, while Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF (ASHR) has a volatility of 8.70%. This indicates that EPP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASHR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EPP | ASHR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.96% | 8.70% | -4.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.68% | 14.34% | -1.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.06% | 18.94% | -3.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.50% | 24.11% | -6.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.99% | 24.15% | -5.16% |
EPP vs. ASHR - Expense Ratio Comparison
EPP has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than ASHR's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
EPP vs. ASHR - Dividend Comparison
EPP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.44%, more than ASHR's 2.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASHR Xtrackers Harvest CSI 300 China A-Shares ETF | 2.20% | 2.31% | 1.13% | 2.48% | 1.13% | 0.88% | 0.81% | 0.98% | 1.32% | 0.84% | 0.73% | 30.13% |
EPP iShares MSCI Pacific ex Japan ETF | 3.44% | 3.77% | 3.81% | 4.10% | 4.37% | 4.58% | 2.28% | 3.89% | 5.00% | 4.15% | 3.96% | 4.90% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EPP and ASHR 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.
ASHR has higher volatility (8.70%) compared to EPP (3.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EPP dropped -66.01% vs ASHR's -51.30%.
On 10-year performance, EPP leads with 7.03% vs 4.74% for ASHR. On fees, EPP is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, EPP has been the lower-risk option at 3.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EPP has performed better with a 7.03% return vs 4.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EPP is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHR.
EPP has the higher dividend yield at 3.44%, compared with 2.20% for ASHR.
EPP is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while ASHR is China Equities. EPP tracks MSCI Pacific ex-Japan Index, while ASHR tracks CSI 300 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for EPP and 0.65% for ASHR.
ASHR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 0.90), 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.
Find the right allocation for EPP and ASHR
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