PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EWA vs. BBAX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EWA vs. BBAX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EWA (iShares MSCI-Australia ETF) and BBAX (JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWA tracks the MSCI Australia Index while BBAX tracks the Morningstar Developed Asia Pacific ex-Japan Target Market Exposure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWA returned 5.49%/yr vs 4.79%/yr for BBAX. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EWA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BBAX.

Performance

EWA vs. BBAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF (BBAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWA achieves a 8.49% return, which is significantly higher than BBAX's 7.03% return.

EWA

1D
-1.51%
1M
-1.27%
YTD
8.49%
6M
6.78%
1Y
12.05%
3Y*
11.88%
5Y*
5.49%
10Y*
8.38%

BBAX

1D
-2.11%
1M
-2.67%
YTD
7.03%
6M
5.44%
1Y
15.68%
3Y*
12.30%
5Y*
4.79%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EWA vs. BBAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
EWA
iShares MSCI-Australia ETF		8.49%13.35%1.60%13.81%-5.92%8.93%8.29%22.45%-12.23%
BBAX
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF		7.03%20.21%2.50%5.60%-4.80%5.53%8.02%18.66%-9.65%

Correlation

The correlation between EWA and BBAX is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.96

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

0.96

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

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2018

0.94

The correlation between EWA and BBAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWA vs. BBAX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EWA
BBAX

Financial Services

41.4%
45.0%

Basic Materials

26.4%
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
5.2%

Real Estate

5.1%
8.4%

Healthcare

4.3%
4.1%

Industrials

4.2%
8.0%

Energy

4.2%
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
3.1%

Communication Services

1.9%
2.7%

Utilities

1.6%
3.2%

Technology

1.0%
0.2%

Financial Services

EWA
41.4%
BBAX
45.0%

Basic Materials

EWA
26.4%
BBAX
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

EWA
6.5%
BBAX
5.2%

Real Estate

EWA
5.1%
BBAX
8.4%

Healthcare

EWA
4.3%
BBAX
4.1%

Industrials

EWA
4.2%
BBAX
8.0%

Energy

EWA
4.2%
BBAX
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

EWA
3.6%
BBAX
3.1%

Communication Services

EWA
1.9%
BBAX
2.7%

Utilities

EWA
1.6%
BBAX
3.2%

Technology

EWA
1.0%
BBAX
0.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI-Australia ETF

JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF

Often compared with EWA:
EWA vs. EWCEWA vs. FLAUEWA vs. EWJEWA vs. EWOEWA vs. VOOEWA vs. ^N225EWA vs. SPY
Often compared with BBAX:
BBAX vs. AAXJBBAX vs. EPPBBAX vs. BBJPBBAX vs. BBEUBBAX vs. GMFBBAX vs. AIABBAX vs. EMMF

Return for Risk

EWA vs. BBAX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EWA
EWA Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
EWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWA Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
EWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWA Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank
BBAX
BBAX Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
BBAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBAX Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
BBAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBAX Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
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.

EWA vs. BBAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF (BBAX). 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.

EWABBAXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.70
1.05

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.07
1.51

-0.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.19

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.21

1.75

-0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.29

5.35

-2.06

EWA vs. BBAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is lower than the BBAX Sharpe Ratio of 1.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWA and BBAX, 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

EWA vs. BBAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWA drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, which is greater than BBAX's maximum drawdown of -39.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWA and BBAX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EWABBAXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.98%

-39.64%

-27.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.01%

-9.01%

-1.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.91%

-20.12%

-1.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.87%

-23.21%

-1.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.54%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.10%

-6.22%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.32%

-7.20%

-4.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.67%

2.94%

+0.73%

Volatility

EWA vs. BBAX - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF (BBAX) have volatilities of 5.73% and 5.61%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EWABBAXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.73%

5.61%

+0.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.76%

12.74%

+2.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.44%

15.05%

+2.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.80%

17.40%

+2.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.55%

19.70%

+2.85%

EWA vs. BBAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BBAX's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWA vs. BBAX - Dividend Comparison

EWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, less than BBAX's 3.70% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BBAX
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia ex-Japan ETF		3.70%3.86%4.13%4.17%5.06%5.47%2.57%4.07%1.36%0.00%0.00%0.00%
EWA
iShares MSCI-Australia ETF		3.03%3.21%3.71%3.72%5.28%5.08%2.02%3.97%6.11%4.44%4.03%5.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.96, EWA and BBAX 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.

EWA has higher volatility (5.73%) compared to BBAX (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWA dropped -66.98% vs BBAX's -39.64%.

On 5-year performance, EWA leads with 5.49% vs 4.79% for BBAX. On fees, BBAX is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, BBAX has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EWA has performed better with a 5.49% return vs 4.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BBAX is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EWA.

BBAX has the higher dividend yield at 3.70%, compared with 3.03% for EWA.

EWA tracks MSCI Australia Index, while BBAX tracks Morningstar Developed Asia Pacific ex-Japan Target Market Exposure Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWA and 0.19% for BBAX.

BBAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.05 vs 0.70), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EWA and BBAX

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