EZA vs. GEME
EZA (iShares MSCI South Africa ETF) and GEME (Pacific North of South Global Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. EZA is passively managed, while GEME is actively managed. Over the past year, EZA returned 28.73% vs 66.20% for GEME. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EZA charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GEME.
Performance
EZA vs. GEME - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EZA achieves a -6.17% return, which is significantly lower than GEME's 34.41% return.
EZA
- 1D
- 1.59%
- 1M
- -7.53%
- YTD
- -6.17%
- 6M
- -7.67%
- 1Y
- 28.73%
- 3Y*
- 24.11%
- 5Y*
- 9.89%
- 10Y*
- 8.07%
GEME
- 1D
- 1.12%
- 1M
- -0.84%
- YTD
- 34.41%
- 6M
- 35.53%
- 1Y
- 66.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EZA vs. GEME - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EZA iShares MSCI South Africa ETF | -6.17% | 69.30% |
GEME Pacific North of South Global Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF | 34.41% | 37.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between EZA and GEME is 0.62, 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 | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 23, 2025 | 0.61 |
The correlation between EZA and GEME has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
EZA vs. GEME — Risk / Return Rank
EZA
GEME
EZA vs. GEME - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) and Pacific North of South Global Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (GEME). 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.
| EZA | GEME | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.52 | -0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.24 | 4.94 | -3.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.04 | 18.16 | -15.13 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EZA vs. GEME - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EZA drawdown since its inception was -64.64%, which is greater than GEME's maximum drawdown of -16.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZA and GEME.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EZA | GEME | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.64% | -16.86% | -47.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.31% | -13.46% | -9.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.94% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -62.25% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.89% | -4.16% | -16.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.92% | -2.39% | -14.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.48% | 3.66% | +5.82% |
Volatility
EZA vs. GEME - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI South Africa ETF (EZA) and Pacific North of South Global Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (GEME) have volatilities of 10.79% and 10.66%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EZA | GEME | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.79% | 10.66% | +0.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.45% | 20.45% | +7.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.15% | 23.00% | +9.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.93% | 23.94% | +4.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.28% | 23.94% | +7.34% |
EZA vs. GEME - Expense Ratio Comparison
EZA has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than GEME's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
EZA vs. GEME - Dividend Comparison
EZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.99%, more than GEME's 5.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EZA iShares MSCI South Africa ETF | 7.99% | 6.16% | 7.26% | 2.84% | 3.90% | 2.05% | 5.51% | 12.27% | 3.81% | 1.55% | 4.10% | 3.03% |
GEME Pacific North of South Global Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF | 5.21% | 7.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EZA and GEME have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EZA has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to GEME (10.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EZA dropped -64.64% vs GEME's -16.86%.
On 1-year performance, GEME leads with 66.20% vs 28.73% for EZA. On fees, EZA is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, GEME has been the lower-risk option at 10.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GEME has performed better with a 66.20% return vs 28.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EZA is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GEME.
EZA has the higher dividend yield at 7.99%, compared with 5.21% for GEME.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacific AM. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for EZA and 0.75% for GEME.
GEME currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 0.90), 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 EZA and GEME
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