PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EWH vs. ASEA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EWH vs. ASEA

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

EWH (iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF) and ASEA (Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWH tracks the MSCI Hong Kong 25-50 Index (USD) (Net) while ASEA tracks the FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWH returned 4.58%/yr vs 7.72%/yr for ASEA. Their 0.56 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. EWH charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASEA.

Performance

EWH vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWH achieves a 10.37% return, which is significantly lower than ASEA's 17.61% return. Over the past 10 years, EWH has underperformed ASEA with an annualized return of 4.58%, while ASEA has yielded a comparatively higher 7.72% annualized return.

EWH

1D
-0.94%
1M
10.27%
6M
0.31%
YTD
10.37%
1Y
19.07%
3Y*
10.31%
5Y*
1.39%
10Y*
4.58%
ALL TIME*
4.96%

ASEA

1D
-0.56%
1M
6.95%
6M
10.72%
YTD
17.61%
1Y
32.88%
3Y*
15.21%
5Y*
13.10%
10Y*
7.72%
ALL TIME*
5.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

ASEA

Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF
$394.47K$542.80K$604.39K

EWH

iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF
$69.57M$66.33M$66.62M

EWH vs. ASEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		10.37%34.50%0.00%-13.87%-6.81%-3.49%4.17%10.74%-8.76%36.46%
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF		17.61%19.80%9.82%4.88%5.24%4.66%-7.88%8.34%-7.58%35.06%

Correlation

The correlation between EWH and ASEA is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.59

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.49

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2011

0.56

The correlation between EWH and ASEA shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (3 years) to 0.59 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EWH vs. ASEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EWH
ASEA

Financial Services

42.5%
60.3%

Industrials

19.8%
15.6%

Real Estate

17.5%
2.8%

Utilities

12.1%
4.3%

Consumer Cyclical

3.8%
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
2.1%

Communication Services

1.8%
8.0%

Basic Materials

-

1.5%

Energy

-

3.2%

Healthcare

-

2.2%

Technology

-

-

Financial Services

EWH
42.5%
ASEA
60.3%

Industrials

EWH
19.8%
ASEA
15.6%

Real Estate

EWH
17.5%
ASEA
2.8%

Utilities

EWH
12.1%
ASEA
4.3%

Consumer Cyclical

EWH
3.8%
ASEA
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

EWH
2.6%
ASEA
2.1%

Communication Services

EWH
1.8%
ASEA
8.0%

Basic Materials

EWH

-

ASEA
1.5%

Energy

EWH

-

ASEA
3.2%

Healthcare

EWH

-

ASEA
2.2%

Technology

EWH

-

ASEA

-

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 Hong Kong ETF

Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF

Often compared with EWH:
EWH vs. MCHIEWH vs. FXIEWH vs. EWYEWH vs. EWSEWH vs. EWTEWH vs. EWJEWH vs. EPP
Often compared with ASEA:
ASEA vs. ASIAASEA vs. EWSASEA vs. EIDOASEA vs. FLLAASEA vs. VWOASEA vs. EPIASEA vs. VTI

Return for Risk

EWH vs. ASEA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
EWH
EWH Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
EWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWH Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
EWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWH Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank
ASEA
ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EWH vs. ASEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). 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.

EWHASEADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.02
2.43

-1.41

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.51
3.43

-1.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.43

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.27

4.22

-2.96

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.29

11.27

-7.99

EWH vs. ASEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWH Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the ASEA Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWH and ASEA, 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

EWH vs. ASEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWH drawdown since its inception was -66.44%, which is greater than ASEA's maximum drawdown of -44.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWH and ASEA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EWHASEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.44%

-44.16%

-22.28%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.41%

-8.28%

-5.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.77%

-22.20%

-1.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.32%

-22.20%

-17.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.71%

-44.16%

+1.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.47%

-0.56%

-3.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.43%

-10.56%

-8.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.17%

3.10%

+2.07%

Volatility

EWH vs. ASEA - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) has a higher volatility of 4.14% compared to Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) at 3.39%. This indicates that EWH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EWHASEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.14%

3.39%

+0.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.01%

11.34%

+0.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.70%

14.53%

+2.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.09%

14.71%

+5.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.52%

17.49%

+2.03%

EWH vs. ASEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWH has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than ASEA's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWH vs. ASEA - Dividend Comparison

EWH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.49%, more than ASEA's 3.67% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ASEA
Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF		3.67%3.95%3.61%3.76%2.23%4.19%2.27%2.51%3.08%1.59%2.78%3.64%
EWH
iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF		4.49%5.20%4.17%4.28%2.91%2.78%2.56%2.71%2.93%4.35%3.08%2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

EWH and ASEA have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EWH has higher volatility (4.14%) compared to ASEA (3.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWH dropped -66.44% vs ASEA's -44.16%.

On 10-year performance, ASEA leads with 7.72% vs 4.58% for EWH. On fees, EWH is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ASEA has performed better with a 7.72% return vs 4.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EWH is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

EWH has the higher dividend yield at 4.49%, compared with 3.67% for ASEA.

EWH tracks MSCI Hong Kong 25-50 Index (USD) (Net), while ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWH and 0.65% for ASEA.

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 1.02), 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 EWH and ASEA

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