FEAAX vs. IASMX
Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A (FEAAX) and Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund (IASMX).
FEAAX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Mar 25, 1994. IASMX is managed by Guinness Atkinson. It was launched on Apr 28, 1996.
Performance
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FEAAX Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A | 0.84% | 36.67% | 20.63% | 13.50% | -30.79% | -15.06% | 72.51% | 30.64% | -15.11% | 45.96% |
IASMX Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund | -1.19% | 29.64% | 4.38% | 5.95% | -28.04% | -6.46% | 26.02% | 29.32% | -17.58% | 47.12% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FEAAX achieves a 0.84% return, which is significantly higher than IASMX's -1.19% return. Over the past 10 years, FEAAX has outperformed IASMX with an annualized return of 12.37%, while IASMX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.59% annualized return.
FEAAX
- 1D
- -1.10%
- 1M
- -12.55%
- YTD
- 0.84%
- 6M
- 2.32%
- 1Y
- 33.90%
- 3Y*
- 20.49%
- 5Y*
- 2.14%
- 10Y*
- 12.37%
IASMX
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- -8.38%
- YTD
- -1.19%
- 6M
- -2.18%
- 1Y
- 26.03%
- 3Y*
- 9.95%
- 5Y*
- -1.62%
- 10Y*
- 7.59%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FEAAX has a 1.20% expense ratio, which is lower than IASMX's 1.98% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
FEAAX vs. IASMX — Risk / Return Rank
FEAAX
IASMX
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A (FEAAX) and Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund (IASMX). 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.
| FEAAX | IASMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.63 | 1.26 | +0.36 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.16 | 1.80 | +0.36 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.25 | +0.06 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.24 | 1.49 | +0.74 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.10 | 6.38 | +1.72 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FEAAX | IASMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.63 | 1.26 | +0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 | -0.08 | +0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 | 0.37 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.35 | 0.16 | +0.19 |
Correlation
The correlation between FEAAX and IASMX is 0.84, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Dividend Comparison
FEAAX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IASMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.01%.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FEAAX Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 12.88% | 6.62% | 5.21% | 6.49% | 0.03% | 1.10% | 0.84% |
IASMX Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund | 7.01% | 6.92% | 1.51% | 1.16% | 3.40% | 9.14% | 5.78% | 6.61% | 12.82% | 0.90% | 1.44% | 1.18% |
Drawdowns
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FEAAX drawdown since its inception was -60.87%, smaller than the maximum IASMX drawdown of -76.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEAAX and IASMX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FEAAX | IASMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.87% | -76.53% | +15.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.56% | -15.27% | +1.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.46% | -49.08% | -4.38% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -57.90% | -52.51% | -5.39% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.56% | -18.06% | +4.50% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.29% | -33.36% | +13.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.74% | 3.57% | +0.17% |
Volatility
FEAAX vs. IASMX - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Advisor Emerging Asia Fund Class A (FEAAX) has a higher volatility of 9.61% compared to Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus Fund (IASMX) at 6.81%. This indicates that FEAAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IASMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| FEAAX | IASMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.61% | 6.81% | +2.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.64% | 12.32% | +2.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.30% | 20.10% | +0.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.55% | 21.22% | +1.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.70% | 20.61% | +0.09% |