EWM vs. EEMA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EWM (iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF) and EEMA (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds from iShares - EWM tracks the MSCI Malaysia Index while EEMA tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWM returned 2.59%/yr vs 10.80%/yr for EEMA. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWM charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for EEMA.

Performance

EWM vs. EEMA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWM achieves a 2.45% return, which is significantly lower than EEMA's 27.78% return. Over the past 10 years, EWM has underperformed EEMA with an annualized return of 2.59%, while EEMA has yielded a comparatively higher 10.80% annualized 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%

EEMA

• 1D: -1.17%
• 1M: 9.00%
• YTD: 27.78%
• 6M: 30.96%
• 1Y: 56.77%
• 3Y*: 24.08%
• 5Y*: 7.05%
• 10Y*: 10.80%

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

EWM vs. EEMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EWM iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF	2.45%	15.74%	19.46%	-3.61%	-6.00%	-7.40%	3.12%	-1.41%	-6.28%	24.25%
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF	27.78%	33.27%	10.23%	6.57%	-21.49%	-4.22%	25.17%	18.60%	-15.76%	43.41%

Correlation

The correlation between EWM and EEMA is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 10, 2012	0.61

The correlation between EWM and EEMA shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (5 years) to 0.61 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EWM vs. EEMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EWM	EEMA
Financial Services	46.6%	15.9%
Industrials	11.1%	8.8%
Utilities	10.8%	1.8%
Basic Materials	8.9%	4.5%
Consumer Defensive	7.3%	2.8%
Communication Services	6.6%	6.0%
Energy	3.9%	3.2%
Healthcare	3.8%	3.7%
Consumer Cyclical	1.1%	11.3%
Real Estate	-	0.8%
Technology	-	41.2%

Return for Risk

EWM vs. EEMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EWM

EWM Risk / Return Rank: 45
EWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
EWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
EWM Omega Ratio Rank: 40
EWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
EWM Martin Ratio Rank: 49

EEMA

EEMA Risk / Return Rank: 81
EEMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EEMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
EEMA Omega Ratio Rank: 82
EEMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EEMA Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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. EEMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA). 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	EEMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	2.80	-1.31
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	3.64	-1.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.50	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.65	3.99	-1.34
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.22	15.03	-6.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EWM vs. EEMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the EEMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWM and EEMA, 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

	EWM	EEMA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.49	2.80	-1.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.35	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.16	0.52	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.07	0.37	-0.31

Drawdowns

EWM vs. EEMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWM drawdown since its inception was -89.19%, which is greater than EEMA's maximum drawdown of -44.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWM and EEMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	EWM	EEMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.19%	-44.18%	-45.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.86%	-14.30%	+6.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.31%	-20.23%	-1.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.76%	-40.67%	+17.91%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.81%	-44.18%	+0.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.46%	-1.17%	-8.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.82%	-13.97%	-17.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.53%	3.79%	-1.26%

Volatility

EWM vs. EEMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) is 4.15%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) has a volatility of 8.53%. This indicates that EWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EWM	EEMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.15%	8.53%	-4.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.86%	17.40%	-6.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.99%	20.39%	-6.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.70%	20.41%	-6.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.29%	20.87%	-4.58%

EWM vs. EEMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWM has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than EEMA's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWM vs. EEMA - Dividend Comparison

EWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.33%, more than EEMA's 1.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF	1.16%	1.48%	1.74%	2.02%	1.78%	2.19%	1.15%	1.86%	2.17%	1.74%	1.74%	2.44%
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

Can I hold both EWM and EEMA in my portfolio?

EWM and EEMA have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EWM or EEMA?

EEMA has higher volatility (8.53%) compared to EWM (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWM dropped -89.19% vs EEMA's -44.18%.

Which ETF is better, EWM or EEMA?

On 10-year performance, EEMA leads with 10.80% vs 2.59% for EWM. On fees, EWM is cheaper at 0.49% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, EWM or EEMA?

Over the 10-year period, EEMA has performed better with a 10.80% return vs 2.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EWM or EEMA?

EWM is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EEMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EWM or EEMA?

EWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.33%, compared with 1.16% for EEMA.

What is the main difference between EWM and EEMA?

EWM tracks MSCI Malaysia Index, while EEMA tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EWM and 0.50% for EEMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EEMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 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.