EWS vs. BKEM
EWS (iShares MSCI Singapore ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - EWS tracks the MSCI Singapore Index while BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EWS returned 9.39%/yr vs 7.37%/yr for BKEM. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EWS charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.
Performance
EWS vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EWS achieves a 8.22% return, which is significantly lower than BKEM's 30.24% return.
EWS
- 1D
- -0.70%
- 1M
- 4.60%
- YTD
- 8.22%
- 6M
- 8.37%
- 1Y
- 19.41%
- 3Y*
- 21.86%
- 5Y*
- 9.39%
- 10Y*
- 7.91%
BKEM
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- 8.75%
- YTD
- 30.24%
- 6M
- 32.64%
- 1Y
- 57.21%
- 3Y*
- 24.11%
- 5Y*
- 7.37%
- 10Y*
- —
EWS vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EWS iShares MSCI Singapore ETF | 8.22% | 31.35% | 22.10% | 6.15% | -9.80% | 5.47% | 25.18% |
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 EWS and BKEM is 0.58, 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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2020 | 0.68 |
The correlation between EWS and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
EWS vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EWS
BKEM
Financial Services
Industrials
Real Estate
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Financial Services
EWS
BKEM
Industrials
EWS
BKEM
Real Estate
EWS
BKEM
Utilities
EWS
BKEM
Consumer Defensive
EWS
BKEM
Communication Services
EWS
BKEM
Technology
EWS
BKEM
Consumer Cyclical
EWS
BKEM
Basic Materials
EWS
-
BKEM
Energy
EWS
-
BKEM
Healthcare
EWS
-
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
EWS vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank
EWS
BKEM
EWS vs. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (EWS) 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.
| EWS | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.32 | 2.95 | -1.63 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.96 | 3.83 | -1.87 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.52 | -0.28 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.49 | 4.39 | -1.89 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.08 | 16.85 | -10.77 |
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
| EWS | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.32 | 2.95 | -1.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.55 | 0.40 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.44 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.75 | -0.61 |
Drawdowns
EWS vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EWS drawdown since its inception was -75.00%, which is greater than BKEM's maximum drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWS and BKEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EWS | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -75.00% | -39.48% | -35.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.82% | -13.11% | +5.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.34% | -18.38% | +2.04% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.06% | -36.53% | +7.47% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.84% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.70% | -0.95% | +0.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.88% | -16.00% | -5.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.20% | 3.41% | -0.21% |
Volatility
EWS vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Singapore ETF (EWS) is 3.68%, while BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a volatility of 8.10%. This indicates that EWS 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
| EWS | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.68% | 8.10% | -4.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.45% | 16.75% | -5.30% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.73% | 19.46% | -4.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.25% | 18.73% | -1.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.03% | 19.12% | -1.09% |
EWS vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EWS has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
EWS vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison
EWS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.79%, 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% |
EWS iShares MSCI Singapore ETF | 3.79% | 4.10% | 4.28% | 6.50% | 2.56% | 6.00% | 2.68% | 4.70% | 4.21% | 3.46% | 3.96% | 4.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EWS and BKEM have a correlation of 0.58, 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 EWS (3.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWS dropped -75.00% vs BKEM's -39.48%.
On 5-year performance, EWS leads with 9.39% vs 7.37% for BKEM. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, EWS has been the lower-risk option at 3.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EWS has performed better with a 9.39% return vs 7.37%. 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 0.50% for EWS.
EWS has the higher dividend yield at 3.79%, compared with 1.45% for BKEM.
EWS tracks MSCI Singapore Index, while BKEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EWS and 0.11% for BKEM.
BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 1.32), 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 EWS 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