EWH vs. BKEM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EWH (iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWH tracks the MSCI Hong Kong Index while BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWH returned -0.71%/yr vs 8.18%/yr for BKEM. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWH charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.

Performance

EWH vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) 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, EWH achieves a 2.00% return, which is significantly lower than BKEM's 32.06% return.

EWH

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: -7.73%
• YTD: 2.00%
• 6M: 0.16%
• 1Y: 17.74%
• 3Y*: 8.52%
• 5Y*: -0.71%
• 10Y*: 4.79%

BKEM

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 8.00%
• YTD: 32.06%
• 6M: 33.16%
• 1Y: 56.67%
• 3Y*: 24.82%
• 5Y*: 8.18%
• 10Y*: —

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

EWH vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EWH iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF	2.00%	34.50%	0.00%	-13.87%	-6.81%	-3.49%	20.29%
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	32.06%	30.55%	7.53%	8.68%	-19.43%	-3.91%	48.44%

Correlation

The correlation between EWH and BKEM is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 24, 2020	0.70

The correlation between EWH and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

EWH vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWH	BKEM
Financial Services	43.9%	16.9%
Industrials	18.3%	8.1%
Real Estate	18.0%	1.1%
Utilities	11.6%	2.0%
Consumer Cyclical	3.9%	8.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	2.6%
Communication Services	1.7%	5.8%
Basic Materials	-	5.7%
Energy	-	3.4%
Healthcare	-	2.7%
Technology	-	43.0%

Return for Risk

EWH vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWH

EWH Risk / Return Rank: 30
EWH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
EWH Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
EWH Omega Ratio Rank: 28
EWH Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EWH Martin Ratio Rank: 32

BKEM

BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 83
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

EWH vs. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) 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.

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.

	EWH	BKEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.06	2.66	-1.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.56	3.34	-1.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.48	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.38	4.35	-2.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.55	15.95	-11.40

EWH vs. BKEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWH Sharpe Ratio is 1.06, which is lower than the BKEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWH 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.

Drawdowns

EWH vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWH drawdown since its inception was -66.44%, which is greater than BKEM's maximum drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWH and BKEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWH	BKEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.44%	-39.48%	-26.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.91%	-13.11%	+0.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.93%	-18.38%	-6.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-41.28%	-36.20%	-5.08%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.71%	0.00%	-11.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.47%	-15.90%	-3.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.91%	3.56%	+0.35%

Volatility

EWH vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF (EWH) is 5.30%, while BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a volatility of 10.81%. This indicates that EWH 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

	EWH	BKEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.30%	10.81%	-5.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.57%	19.24%	-6.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.78%	21.46%	-4.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.11%	19.19%	+0.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.59%	19.43%	+0.16%

EWH vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWH has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWH vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison

EWH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.86%, more than BKEM's 1.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.43%	2.25%	2.76%	3.02%	3.15%	2.22%	1.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EWH iShares MSCI Hong Kong ETF	4.86%	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

Can I hold both EWH and BKEM in my portfolio?

EWH and BKEM have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWH or BKEM?

BKEM has higher volatility (10.81%) compared to EWH (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWH dropped -66.44% vs BKEM's -39.48%.

Which ETF is better, EWH or BKEM?

On 5-year performance, BKEM leads with 8.18% vs -0.71% for EWH. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, EWH has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EWH or BKEM?

Over the 5-year period, BKEM has performed better with a 8.18% return vs -0.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWH or BKEM?

BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EWH.

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

EWH has the higher dividend yield at 4.86%, compared with 1.43% for BKEM.

What is the main difference between EWH and BKEM?

EWH tracks MSCI Hong Kong Index, while BKEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EWH and 0.11% for BKEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 1.06), 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.