PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EWM vs. BKEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EWM vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison

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

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

EWM vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
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

46.6%
18.9%

Industrials

11.1%
9.0%

Utilities

10.8%
2.3%

Basic Materials

8.9%
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

7.3%
2.9%

Communication Services

6.6%
6.6%

Energy

3.9%
4.0%

Healthcare

3.8%
3.2%

Consumer Cyclical

1.1%
9.7%

Real Estate

-

1.2%

Technology

-

35.9%

Financial Services

EWM
46.6%
BKEM
18.9%

Industrials

EWM
11.1%
BKEM
9.0%

Utilities

EWM
10.8%
BKEM
2.3%

Basic Materials

EWM
8.9%
BKEM
6.4%

Consumer Defensive

EWM
7.3%
BKEM
2.9%

Communication Services

EWM
6.6%
BKEM
6.6%

Energy

EWM
3.9%
BKEM
4.0%

Healthcare

EWM
3.8%
BKEM
3.2%

Consumer Cyclical

EWM
1.1%
BKEM
9.7%

Real Estate

EWM

-

BKEM
1.2%

Technology

EWM

-

BKEM
35.9%

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

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

EWM
EWM Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
EWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWM Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
EWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWM Martin Ratio Rank: 4949
Martin Ratio Rank

BKEM
BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


EWMBKEMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.49

2.95

-1.47

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.09

3.83

-1.74

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.52

-0.26

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.65

4.39

-1.74

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

8.22

16.85

-8.62

EWM vs. BKEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the BKEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWM 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EWMBKEMDifference

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


EWMBKEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.46%

-0.95%

-8.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-31.82%

-16.00%

-15.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


EWMBKEMDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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