PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IPAC vs. IEMG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IPAC vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IPAC achieves a 14.24% return, which is significantly lower than IEMG's 16.38% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IPAC having a 8.82% annualized return and IEMG not far ahead at 8.84%.


IPAC

1D
-0.96%
1M
0.87%
6M
7.59%
YTD
14.24%
1Y
26.06%
3Y*
16.33%
5Y*
8.37%
10Y*
8.82%
ALL TIME*
7.31%

IEMG

1D
0.73%
1M
-2.79%
6M
7.82%
YTD
16.38%
1Y
32.88%
3Y*
18.00%
5Y*
7.26%
10Y*
8.84%
ALL TIME*
6.11%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$833.06M$972.69M$1.09B
$5.46M$8.24M$8.98M

IPAC vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IPAC
iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF
14.24%25.16%6.18%14.51%-13.68%3.09%12.39%19.44%-12.78%25.97%
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
16.38%32.56%6.50%11.52%-19.98%-0.64%17.87%17.81%-14.92%37.38%

Correlation

The correlation between IPAC and IEMG is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.72

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.74

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2014

0.75

The correlation between IPAC and IEMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

IPAC vs. IEMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IPAC
IEMG

Financial Services

24.9%
17.3%

Industrials

20.5%
7.7%

Technology

13.7%
43.6%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
7.7%

Basic Materials

8.3%
5.8%

Healthcare

5.4%
3.2%

Real Estate

5.0%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
2.8%

Communication Services

3.8%
5.6%

Energy

1.7%
3.0%

Utilities

1.6%
1.9%

Financial Services

IPAC
24.9%
IEMG
17.3%

Industrials

IPAC
20.5%
IEMG
7.7%

Technology

IPAC
13.7%
IEMG
43.6%

Consumer Cyclical

IPAC
10.6%
IEMG
7.7%

Basic Materials

IPAC
8.3%
IEMG
5.8%

Healthcare

IPAC
5.4%
IEMG
3.2%

Real Estate

IPAC
5.0%
IEMG
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

IPAC
4.0%
IEMG
2.8%

Communication Services

IPAC
3.8%
IEMG
5.6%

Energy

IPAC
1.7%
IEMG
3.0%

Utilities

IPAC
1.6%
IEMG
1.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

IPAC vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IPAC
IPAC Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IPAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IPAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
IPAC Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
IPAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
IPAC Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

IEMG
IEMG Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
IEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
IEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IPAC vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). 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.


IPACIEMGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.26

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.32

2.33

0.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.11

7.16

+0.95

IPAC vs. IEMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IPAC Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the IEMG Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IPAC and IEMG, 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

IPAC vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IPAC drawdown since its inception was -30.99%, smaller than the maximum IEMG drawdown of -38.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IPAC and IEMG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IPACIEMGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.99%

-38.71%

+7.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.49%

-13.78%

+2.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.45%

-17.21%

+1.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.64%

-33.61%

+3.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.99%

-38.71%

+7.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.71%

-9.76%

+8.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.41%

-12.89%

+5.48%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.29%

4.47%

-1.18%

Volatility

IPAC vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF (IPAC) is 5.93%, while iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a volatility of 8.73%. This indicates that IPAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IPACIEMGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.93%

8.73%

-2.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.93%

21.74%

-6.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.58%

23.71%

-6.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.89%

19.27%

-2.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.65%

20.32%

-3.67%

IPAC vs. IEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IPAC and IEMG have an expense ratio of 0.09%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IPAC vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison

IPAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%, more than IEMG's 2.32% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
2.32%2.75%3.20%2.89%2.71%3.06%1.87%3.15%2.76%2.35%2.28%2.53%
IPAC
iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF
3.86%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


IPAC and IEMG have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IEMG has higher volatility (8.73%) compared to IPAC (5.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IPAC dropped -30.99% vs IEMG's -38.71%.

On 10-year performance, IEMG leads with 8.84% vs 8.82% for IPAC. Both ETFs have the same 0.09% expense ratio. On volatility, IPAC has been the lower-risk option at 5.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IEMG has performed better with a 8.84% return vs 8.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IPAC and IEMG have the same expense ratio: 0.09% per year.

IPAC has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 2.32% for IEMG.

IPAC is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IEMG is Emerging Markets Equities. IPAC tracks MSCI Pacific IMI Index (Net), while IEMG tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net).

IPAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs 1.35), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IPAC and IEMG

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