EWA vs. FPA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EWA (iShares MSCI-Australia ETF) and FPA (First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWA tracks the MSCI Australia Index while FPA tracks the NASDAQ AlphaDEX Asia Pacific Ex-Japan Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWA returned 8.41%/yr vs 11.25%/yr for FPA. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for FPA.

Performance

EWA vs. FPA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA). 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 FPA's 51.47% return. Over the past 10 years, EWA has underperformed FPA with an annualized return of 8.41%, while FPA has yielded a comparatively higher 11.25% annualized 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%

FPA

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: 9.98%
• YTD: 51.47%
• 6M: 51.19%
• 1Y: 82.43%
• 3Y*: 33.32%
• 5Y*: 13.09%
• 10Y*: 11.25%

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

EWA vs. FPA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EWA iShares MSCI-Australia ETF	11.26%	13.35%	1.60%	13.81%	-5.92%	8.93%	8.29%	22.45%	-12.04%	19.88%
FPA First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund	51.47%	43.16%	3.95%	9.97%	-14.55%	2.98%	13.43%	8.91%	-21.91%	35.81%

Correlation

The correlation between EWA and FPA is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2011	0.63

The correlation between EWA and FPA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWA vs. FPA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWA	FPA
Financial Services	43.6%	9.6%
Basic Materials	23.0%	4.9%
Consumer Cyclical	6.1%	8.8%
Real Estate	5.0%	6.9%
Healthcare	4.9%	1.0%
Energy	4.5%	6.7%
Industrials	4.5%	37.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	3.2%
Communication Services	2.0%	2.6%
Utilities	1.7%	5.7%
Technology	1.1%	16.1%

Return for Risk

EWA vs. FPA — 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

FPA

FPA Risk / Return Rank: 88
FPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FPA Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
FPA Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. FPA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) and First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA). 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	FPA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.92	3.24	-2.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.36	3.94	-2.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.54	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.55	5.39	-3.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.43	19.96	-15.53
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. FPA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWA Sharpe Ratio is 0.92, which is lower than the FPA Sharpe Ratio of 3.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWA and FPA, 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	FPA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92	3.24	-2.32
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	0.55	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.37	0.50	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.29	0.33	-0.04

Drawdowns

EWA vs. FPA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWA drawdown since its inception was -66.98%, which is greater than FPA's maximum drawdown of -52.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWA and FPA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWA	FPA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.98%	-52.91%	-14.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.01%	-15.37%	+5.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.91%	-20.66%	-1.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.87%	-35.21%	+10.34%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.54%	-52.91%	+7.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.70%	-4.12%	+0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.33%	-13.49%	+2.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	4.14%	-0.65%

Volatility

EWA vs. FPA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI-Australia ETF (EWA) is 5.46%, while First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA) has a volatility of 12.96%. This indicates that EWA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FPA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EWA	FPA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.46%	12.96%	-7.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.98%	21.92%	-7.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.87%	25.55%	-8.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.73%	23.98%	-4.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.61%	22.39%	+0.22%

EWA vs. FPA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FPA's 0.80% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWA vs. FPA - Dividend Comparison

EWA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.89%, less than FPA's 3.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
FPA First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund	3.52%	4.71%	3.40%	3.02%	4.22%	5.12%	1.59%	3.90%	2.81%	3.15%	2.42%	1.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EWA and FPA in my portfolio?

EWA and FPA have a correlation of 0.58, 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 FPA?

FPA has higher volatility (12.96%) compared to EWA (5.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWA dropped -66.98% vs FPA's -52.91%.

Which ETF is better, EWA or FPA?

On 10-year performance, FPA leads with 11.25% vs 8.41% for EWA. On fees, EWA is cheaper at 0.50% 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 FPA?

Over the 10-year period, FPA has performed better with a 11.25% return vs 8.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWA or FPA?

EWA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FPA.

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

FPA has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 2.89% for EWA.

What is the main difference between EWA and FPA?

EWA tracks MSCI Australia Index, while FPA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Asia Pacific Ex-Japan Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWA and 0.80% for FPA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FPA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.24 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.