EWM vs. BKEM
EWM (iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWM tracks the MSCI Malaysia Index while BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWM returned 4.53%/yr vs 7.37%/yr for BKEM. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWM charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.
Performance
EWM vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EWM achieves a 2.45% return, which is significantly lower than BKEM's 30.24% return.
EWM
- 1D
- -2.37%
- 1M
- -5.11%
- YTD
- 2.45%
- 6M
- 6.54%
- 1Y
- 20.74%
- 3Y*
- 14.49%
- 5Y*
- 4.53%
- 10Y*
- 2.59%
BKEM
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- 8.75%
- YTD
- 30.24%
- 6M
- 32.64%
- 1Y
- 57.21%
- 3Y*
- 24.11%
- 5Y*
- 7.37%
- 10Y*
- —
EWM vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EWM iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF | 2.45% | 15.74% | 19.46% | -3.61% | -6.00% | -7.40% | 26.56% |
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 EWM and BKEM is 0.56, 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 | 0.56 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2020 | 0.54 |
The correlation between EWM and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
EWM vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EWM
BKEM
Financial Services
Industrials
Utilities
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Financial Services
EWM
BKEM
Industrials
EWM
BKEM
Utilities
EWM
BKEM
Basic Materials
EWM
BKEM
Consumer Defensive
EWM
BKEM
Communication Services
EWM
BKEM
Energy
EWM
BKEM
Healthcare
EWM
BKEM
Consumer Cyclical
EWM
BKEM
Real Estate
EWM
-
BKEM
Technology
EWM
-
BKEM
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
EWM vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank
EWM
BKEM
EWM vs. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) 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.
| EWM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.49 | 2.95 | -1.47 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.09 | 3.83 | -1.74 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.52 | -0.26 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.65 | 4.39 | -1.74 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.22 | 16.85 | -8.62 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EWM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.49 | 2.95 | -1.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.33 | 0.40 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.07 | 0.75 | -0.69 |
Drawdowns
EWM vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EWM drawdown since its inception was -89.19%, which is greater than BKEM's maximum drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWM and BKEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EWM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -89.19% | -39.48% | -49.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.86% | -13.11% | +5.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.31% | -18.38% | -2.93% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.76% | -36.53% | +13.77% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -43.81% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.46% | -0.95% | -8.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -31.82% | -16.00% | -15.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.53% | 3.41% | -0.88% |
Volatility
EWM vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) is 4.15%, while BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a volatility of 8.10%. This indicates that EWM 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EWM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.15% | 8.10% | -3.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.86% | 16.75% | -5.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.99% | 19.46% | -5.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.70% | 18.73% | -5.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.29% | 19.12% | -2.83% |
EWM vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EWM has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
EWM vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison
EWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.33%, 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% |
EWM iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF | 3.33% | 3.41% | 3.32% | 3.47% | 3.00% | 6.48% | 1.89% | 2.91% | 3.84% | 5.58% | 5.97% | 37.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EWM and BKEM have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BKEM has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to EWM (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWM dropped -89.19% vs BKEM's -39.48%.
On 5-year performance, BKEM leads with 7.37% vs 4.53% for EWM. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, EWM has been the lower-risk option at 4.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, BKEM has performed better with a 7.37% return vs 4.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EWM.
EWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.33%, compared with 1.45% for BKEM.
EWM tracks MSCI Malaysia 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 EWM and 0.11% for BKEM.
BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 1.49), 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.
Find the right allocation for EWM and BKEM
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