FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FPXS.L (Fidelity Sustainable Research Enhanced Pacific ex-Japan Equity UCITS ETF Acc) and EMAS.L (SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - FPXS.L tracks the MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD while EMAS.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FPXS.L returned 5.99%/yr vs 15.70%/yr for EMAS.L. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FPXS.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMAS.L.

Performance

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Fidelity Sustainable Research Enhanced Pacific ex-Japan Equity UCITS ETF Acc (FPXS.L) and SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FPXS.L achieves a 7.87% return, which is significantly lower than EMAS.L's 81.22% return.

FPXS.L

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: 1.11%
• YTD: 7.87%
• 6M: 7.45%
• 1Y: 15.61%
• 3Y*: 10.79%
• 5Y*: 5.99%
• 10Y*: —

EMAS.L

• 1D: 38.71%
• 1M: 44.55%
• YTD: 81.22%
• 6M: 83.42%
• 1Y: 109.79%
• 3Y*: 35.88%
• 5Y*: 15.70%
• 10Y*: 15.67%

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

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FPXS.L Fidelity Sustainable Research Enhanced Pacific ex-Japan Equity UCITS ETF Acc	7.87%	11.65%	5.81%	0.27%	5.01%	6.21%	-24.05%
EMAS.L SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF	81.22%	22.99%	12.86%	0.62%	-12.26%	-4.94%	2.77%

Correlation

The correlation between FPXS.L and EMAS.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2020	0.64

The correlation between FPXS.L and EMAS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FPXS.L	EMAS.L
Financial Services	47.6%	13.2%
Basic Materials	15.6%	3.3%
Industrials	7.3%	6.5%
Real Estate	7.1%	0.6%
Consumer Cyclical	5.5%	9.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	2.1%
Energy	3.7%	2.4%
Healthcare	3.1%	2.8%
Communication Services	3.0%	6.1%
Utilities	2.1%	1.3%
Technology	1.2%	52.1%

Return for Risk

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FPXS.L

FPXS.L Risk / Return Rank: 43
FPXS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
FPXS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
FPXS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 41
FPXS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FPXS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 40

EMAS.L

EMAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 97
EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
EMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 98
EMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
EMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Sustainable Research Enhanced Pacific ex-Japan Equity UCITS ETF Acc (FPXS.L) and SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L). 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.

	FPXS.L	EMAS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	2.85	-1.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	7.46	-5.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	2.09	-0.85
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	10.86	-8.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.61	35.46	-29.85

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FPXS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FPXS.L and EMAS.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FPXS.L drawdown since its inception was -25.16%, smaller than the maximum EMAS.L drawdown of -53.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPXS.L and EMAS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FPXS.L	EMAS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.16%	-53.67%	+28.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.19%	-11.14%	+2.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.30%	-25.14%	+6.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.30%	-29.16%	+10.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.49%	0.00%	-2.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.24%	-22.16%	+7.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.00%	3.42%	-0.42%

Volatility

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Sustainable Research Enhanced Pacific ex-Japan Equity UCITS ETF Acc (FPXS.L) is 4.53%, while SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) has a volatility of 33.13%. This indicates that FPXS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMAS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FPXS.L	EMAS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	33.13%	-28.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	35.89%	-25.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.57%	42.41%	-29.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.46%	28.52%	-14.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.74%	24.30%	-6.56%

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FPXS.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than EMAS.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

FPXS.L vs. EMAS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FPXS.L nor EMAS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FPXS.L and EMAS.L in my portfolio?

FPXS.L and EMAS.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FPXS.L or EMAS.L?

On fees, FPXS.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FPXS.L or EMAS.L?

FPXS.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAS.L.

What is the main difference between FPXS.L and EMAS.L?

FPXS.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD, while EMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for FPXS.L and 0.55% for EMAS.L.