PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IAPD.L vs. EMAS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IAPD.L vs. EMAS.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

IAPD.L (iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS) and EMAS.L (SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - IAPD.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD while EMAS.L tracks the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IAPD.L returned 7.32%/yr vs 15.67%/yr for EMAS.L. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IAPD.L charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMAS.L.

Performance

IAPD.L vs. EMAS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.L) and SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IAPD.L is traded in GBp, while EMAS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the EMAS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IAPD.L achieves a 11.20% return, which is significantly lower than EMAS.L's 81.22% return. Over the past 10 years, IAPD.L has underperformed EMAS.L with an annualized return of 7.32%, while EMAS.L has yielded a comparatively higher 15.67% annualized return.

IAPD.L

1D
-0.17%
1M
-2.48%
YTD
11.20%
6M
10.61%
1Y
35.04%
3Y*
19.13%
5Y*
10.45%
10Y*
7.32%

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)

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IAPD.L
iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS		11.20%20.92%7.89%7.23%9.69%4.75%-12.58%10.23%-10.11%6.71%
EMAS.L
SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF		81.22%22.99%12.86%0.62%-12.26%-4.94%23.72%13.20%-9.78%29.84%

Correlation

The correlation between IAPD.L and EMAS.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.46

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.58

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2011

0.66

Over the past year, the correlation between IAPD.L and EMAS.L has dropped to 0.46 - well below their long-term average of 0.66, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

Sectors
IAPD.L
EMAS.L

Financial Services

30.8%
13.2%

Basic Materials

18.2%
3.3%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
9.6%

Real Estate

10.0%
0.6%

Industrials

6.7%
6.5%

Energy

4.8%
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

4.6%
2.1%

Communication Services

4.4%
6.1%

Utilities

4.1%
1.3%

Healthcare

3.4%
2.8%

Technology

1.8%
52.1%

Financial Services

IAPD.L
30.8%
EMAS.L
13.2%

Basic Materials

IAPD.L
18.2%
EMAS.L
3.3%

Consumer Cyclical

IAPD.L
11.1%
EMAS.L
9.6%

Real Estate

IAPD.L
10.0%
EMAS.L
0.6%

Industrials

IAPD.L
6.7%
EMAS.L
6.5%

Energy

IAPD.L
4.8%
EMAS.L
2.4%

Consumer Defensive

IAPD.L
4.6%
EMAS.L
2.1%

Communication Services

IAPD.L
4.4%
EMAS.L
6.1%

Utilities

IAPD.L
4.1%
EMAS.L
1.3%

Healthcare

IAPD.L
3.4%
EMAS.L
2.8%

Technology

IAPD.L
1.8%
EMAS.L
52.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS

SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF

Often compared with IAPD.L:
IAPD.L vs. 100D.LIAPD.L vs. JEPQIAPD.L vs. NOBLIAPD.L vs. CNDX.LIAPD.L vs. VAPX.LIAPD.L vs. IJRIAPD.L vs. VOO
Often compared with EMAS.L:
EMAS.L vs. SPYEMAS.L vs. ASEAEMAS.L vs. VFEM.LEMAS.L vs. SWDA.LEMAS.L vs. C300.LEMAS.L vs. VWCE.DEEMAS.L vs. IS3N.DE

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IAPD.L
IAPD.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
IAPD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
EMAS.L
EMAS.L Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMAS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.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.

IAPD.LEMAS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.22
2.85

+0.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.61
7.46

-2.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

2.09

-0.51

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.03

10.86

-5.82

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.37

35.46

-20.09

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

The current IAPD.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.22, which is comparable to the EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IAPD.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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IAPD.L vs. EMAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IAPD.L drawdown since its inception was -56.01%, roughly equal to the maximum EMAS.L drawdown of -53.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAPD.L and EMAS.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IAPD.LEMAS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.01%

-53.67%

-2.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.93%

-11.14%

+4.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.92%

-25.14%

+8.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.92%

-29.16%

+12.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.09%

-34.79%

-3.30%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.63%

0.00%

-4.63%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.68%

-22.16%

+13.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.27%

3.42%

-1.15%

Volatility

IAPD.L vs. EMAS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.L) is 3.07%, while SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) has a volatility of 33.13%. This indicates that IAPD.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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IAPD.LEMAS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.07%

33.13%

-30.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.43%

35.89%

-27.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.86%

42.41%

-31.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.46%

28.52%

-16.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.42%

24.30%

-8.88%

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

IAPD.L has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than EMAS.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

IAPD.L vs. EMAS.L - Dividend Comparison

IAPD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.29%, while EMAS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMAS.L
SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IAPD.L
iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS		4.29%4.20%5.25%5.77%6.84%5.51%3.70%5.67%5.87%4.71%4.22%5.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

IAPD.L and EMAS.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EMAS.L is cheaper at 0.55% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EMAS.L is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for IAPD.L.

IAPD.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD, while EMAS.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for IAPD.L and 0.55% for EMAS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IAPD.L and EMAS.L

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