EWA vs. BKEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EWA (iShares MSCI-Australia ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWA tracks the MSCI Australia Index while BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWA returned 5.51%/yr vs 7.37%/yr for BKEM. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.

Performance

EWA vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWA achieves a 11.26% return, which is significantly lower than BKEM's 30.24% return.

EWA

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: 0.90%
• YTD: 11.26%
• 6M: 13.42%
• 1Y: 15.43%
• 3Y*: 12.60%
• 5Y*: 5.51%
• 10Y*: 8.41%

BKEM

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: 8.75%
• YTD: 30.24%
• 6M: 32.64%
• 1Y: 57.21%
• 3Y*: 24.11%
• 5Y*: 7.37%
• 10Y*: —

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

EWA vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EWA iShares MSCI-Australia ETF	11.26%	13.35%	1.60%	13.81%	-5.92%	8.93%	49.40%
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	30.24%	30.55%	7.53%	8.68%	-19.43%	-3.91%	47.53%

Correlation

The correlation between EWA and BKEM is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2020	0.70

The correlation between EWA and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWA vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWA	BKEM
Financial Services	43.6%	18.9%
Basic Materials	23.0%	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	6.1%	9.7%
Real Estate	5.0%	1.2%
Healthcare	4.9%	3.2%
Energy	4.5%	4.0%
Industrials	4.5%	9.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	2.9%
Communication Services	2.0%	6.6%
Utilities	1.7%	2.3%
Technology	1.1%	35.9%

Return for Risk

EWA vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWA

EWA Risk / Return Rank: 27
EWA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EWA Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EWA Omega Ratio Rank: 24
EWA Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
EWA Martin Ratio Rank: 30

BKEM

BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 84
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). 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.

	EWA	BKEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.92	2.95	-2.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	3.83	-2.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.52	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.55	4.39	-2.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.43	16.85	-12.41
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EWA vs. BKEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.92, which is lower than the BKEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWA and BKEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EWA	BKEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92	2.95	-2.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	0.40	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.29	0.75	-0.46

Drawdowns

EWA vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWA drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, which is greater than BKEM's maximum drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWA and BKEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWA	BKEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.98%	-39.48%	-27.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-13.11%	+3.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.91%	-18.38%	-3.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.87%	-36.53%	+11.66%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.54%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.70%	-0.95%	-2.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.33%	-16.00%	+4.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	3.41%	+0.08%

Volatility

EWA vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) is 5.46%, while BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a volatility of 8.10%. This indicates that EWA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BKEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EWA	BKEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	8.10%	-2.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.98%	16.75%	-2.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.87%	19.46%	-2.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.73%	18.73%	+1.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.61%	19.12%	+3.49%

EWA vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWA vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison

EWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.89%, more than BKEM's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.45%	2.25%	2.76%	3.02%	3.15%	2.22%	1.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EWA iShares MSCI-Australia ETF	2.89%	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

Can I hold both EWA and BKEM in my portfolio?

EWA and BKEM have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWA or BKEM?

BKEM has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to EWA (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWA dropped -66.98% vs BKEM's -39.48%.

Which ETF is better, EWA or BKEM?

On 5-year performance, BKEM leads with 7.37% vs 5.51% for EWA. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, EWA has been the lower-risk option at 5.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EWA or BKEM?

Over the 5-year period, BKEM has performed better with a 7.37% return vs 5.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWA or BKEM?

BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EWA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EWA or BKEM?

EWA has the higher dividend yield at 2.89%, compared with 1.45% for BKEM.

What is the main difference between EWA and BKEM?

EWA tracks MSCI Australia Index, while BKEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWA and 0.11% for BKEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 0.92), 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.