GMF vs. AIA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GMF (SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF) and AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - GMF tracks the S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index while AIA tracks the S&P Asia 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GMF returned 10.35%/yr vs 14.96%/yr for AIA. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GMF charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AIA.

Performance

GMF vs. AIA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMF achieves a 12.22% return, which is significantly lower than AIA's 43.04% return. Over the past 10 years, GMF has underperformed AIA with an annualized return of 10.35%, while AIA has yielded a comparatively higher 14.96% annualized return.

GMF

• 1D: -3.49%
• 1M: 2.67%
• YTD: 12.22%
• 6M: 12.01%
• 1Y: 28.51%
• 3Y*: 18.92%
• 5Y*: 5.45%
• 10Y*: 10.35%

AIA

• 1D: -7.46%
• 1M: 3.93%
• YTD: 43.04%
• 6M: 46.22%
• 1Y: 80.75%
• 3Y*: 36.18%
• 5Y*: 11.29%
• 10Y*: 14.96%

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

GMF vs. AIA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	12.22%	21.99%	16.55%	8.20%	-18.99%	-1.93%	24.96%	19.92%	-14.25%	41.71%
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	43.04%	47.79%	20.26%	4.32%	-24.08%	-10.91%	33.73%	22.21%	-14.22%	45.00%

Correlation

The correlation between GMF and AIA is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2007	0.91

The correlation between GMF and AIA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

GMF vs. AIA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GMF	AIA
Technology	40.8%	63.8%
Financial Services	15.4%	16.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	8.6%
Industrials	7.3%	2.0%
Communication Services	6.4%	7.4%
Basic Materials	5.8%	-
Healthcare	4.5%	0.8%
Energy	3.1%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	-
Utilities	2.0%	-
Real Estate	1.0%	0.5%

Return for Risk

GMF vs. AIA — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMF

GMF Risk / Return Rank: 49
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 49
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 51

AIA

AIA Risk / Return Rank: 86
AIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
AIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
AIA Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
AIA Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

GMF vs. AIA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA). 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.

	GMF	AIA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	2.75	-1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.26	3.20	-0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.48	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.27	5.74	-3.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.24	19.64	-11.40

GMF vs. AIA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is lower than the AIA Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMF and AIA, 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

GMF vs. AIA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMF drawdown since its inception was -67.18%, which is greater than AIA's maximum drawdown of -60.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMF and AIA.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMF	AIA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.18%	-60.89%	-6.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.62%	-14.15%	+1.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.43%	-21.64%	+0.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.76%	-50.11%	+14.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.18%	-54.64%	+14.46%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.49%	-7.46%	+3.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.55%	-16.64%	+0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.47%	4.13%	-0.66%

Volatility

GMF vs. AIA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) is 8.35%, while iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a volatility of 16.92%. This indicates that GMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMF	AIA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.35%	16.92%	-8.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.32%	26.32%	-11.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.78%	29.51%	-11.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.79%	26.34%	-7.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.22%	23.93%	-4.71%

GMF vs. AIA - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than AIA's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMF vs. AIA - Dividend Comparison

GMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, less than AIA's 1.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF	1.54%	2.50%	2.78%	2.07%	2.59%	1.54%	1.11%	2.24%	2.49%	1.45%	2.29%	2.88%
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	1.20%	1.49%	1.92%	2.75%	2.54%	2.71%	1.32%	1.75%	2.26%	1.70%	2.49%	3.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMF and AIA in my portfolio?

GMF and AIA have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMF or AIA?

AIA has higher volatility (16.92%) compared to GMF (8.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMF dropped -67.18% vs AIA's -60.89%.

Which ETF is better, GMF or AIA?

On 10-year performance, AIA leads with 14.96% vs 10.35% for GMF. On fees, GMF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 8.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GMF or AIA?

Over the 10-year period, AIA has performed better with a 14.96% return vs 10.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMF or AIA?

GMF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AIA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GMF or AIA?

AIA has the higher dividend yield at 1.54%, compared with 1.20% for GMF.

What is the main difference between GMF and AIA?

GMF tracks S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index, while AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GMF and 0.50% for AIA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.75 vs 1.61), 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.