IPAC vs. ASEA

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IPAC (iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF) and ASEA (Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - IPAC tracks the MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index while ASEA tracks the FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IPAC returned 9.13%/yr vs 7.64%/yr for ASEA. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IPAC charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ASEA.

Performance

IPAC vs. ASEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 13.73% return, which is significantly higher than ASEA's 9.50% return. Over the past 10 years, IPAC has outperformed ASEA with an annualized return of 9.13%, while ASEA has yielded a comparatively lower 7.64% annualized return.

IPAC

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 4.62%
• YTD: 13.73%
• 6M: 15.39%
• 1Y: 28.03%
• 3Y*: 17.03%
• 5Y*: 7.65%
• 10Y*: 9.13%

ASEA

• 1D: -0.69%
• 1M: 3.21%
• YTD: 9.50%
• 6M: 12.22%
• 1Y: 26.01%
• 3Y*: 14.54%
• 5Y*: 9.70%
• 10Y*: 7.64%

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

IPAC vs. ASEA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	13.73%	25.16%	6.18%	14.51%	-13.68%	3.09%	12.39%	19.44%	-12.78%	25.97%
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	9.50%	19.80%	9.82%	4.88%	5.24%	4.66%	-7.88%	8.34%	-7.58%	35.06%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAC and ASEA is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.64
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2014	0.62

The correlation between IPAC and ASEA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

IPAC vs. ASEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IPAC	ASEA
Financial Services	22.9%	58.6%
Industrials	21.3%	15.4%
Technology	12.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.8%	-
Basic Materials	8.2%	2.1%
Communication Services	5.7%	8.8%
Real Estate	5.5%	2.8%
Healthcare	5.3%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	2.2%
Utilities	1.9%	4.4%
Energy	1.8%	3.5%

Return for Risk

IPAC vs. ASEA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IPAC

IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 50
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 50
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

ASEA

ASEA Risk / Return Rank: 56
ASEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
ASEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ASEA Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ASEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
ASEA Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

IPAC vs. ASEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA). 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.

	IPAC	ASEA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	1.87	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	2.74	-0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.34	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	3.16	-0.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.83	8.72	+0.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IPAC vs. ASEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is comparable to the ASEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAC and ASEA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IPAC	ASEA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.72	1.87	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.67	-0.20
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	0.44	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.27	+0.17

Drawdowns

IPAC vs. ASEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum ASEA drawdown of -44.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and ASEA.

Drawdown Indicators

	IPAC	ASEA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.99%	-44.16%	+13.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.49%	-8.28%	-3.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.45%	-22.20%	+6.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.64%	-22.20%	-7.44%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.99%	-44.16%	+13.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-2.81%	+2.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.48%	-10.66%	+3.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.18%	2.99%	+0.19%

Volatility

IPAC vs. ASEA - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) has a higher volatility of 4.00% compared to Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF (ASEA) at 3.40%. This indicates that IPAC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ASEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IPAC	ASEA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.00%	3.40%	+0.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.09%	11.20%	+1.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.41%	14.01%	+2.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.62%	14.66%	+1.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.58%	17.59%	-1.01%

IPAC vs. ASEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IPAC has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than ASEA's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

IPAC vs. ASEA - Dividend Comparison

IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, more than ASEA's 3.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASEA Global X FTSE Southeast Asia ETF	3.61%	3.95%	3.61%	3.76%	2.23%	4.19%	2.27%	2.51%	3.08%	1.59%	2.78%	3.64%
IPAC iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF	3.80%	4.32%	3.43%	3.16%	2.76%	4.03%	1.68%	3.37%	2.95%	2.98%	2.66%	2.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IPAC and ASEA in my portfolio?

IPAC and ASEA have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IPAC or ASEA?

IPAC has higher volatility (4.00%) compared to ASEA (3.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs ASEA's -44.16%.

Which ETF is better, IPAC or ASEA?

On 10-year performance, IPAC leads with 9.13% vs 7.64% for ASEA. On fees, IPAC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, ASEA has been the lower-risk option at 3.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IPAC or ASEA?

Over the 10-year period, IPAC has performed better with a 9.13% return vs 7.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IPAC or ASEA?

IPAC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASEA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IPAC or ASEA?

IPAC has the higher dividend yield at 3.80%, compared with 3.61% for ASEA.

What is the main difference between IPAC and ASEA?

IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific Investable Market Index, while ASEA tracks FTSE/ASEAN 40 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IPAC and 0.65% for ASEA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASEA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 1.72), 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.