PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
UB20.L vs. EMAS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

UB20.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) and EMAS.L (SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds - UB20.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 10 years, UB20.L returned 8.18%/yr vs 15.67%/yr for EMAS.L. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UB20.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMAS.L.

Performance

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.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

UB20.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, UB20.L achieves a 9.02% return, which is significantly lower than EMAS.L's 81.22% return. Over the past 10 years, UB20.L has underperformed EMAS.L with an annualized return of 8.18%, while EMAS.L has yielded a comparatively higher 15.67% annualized return.

UB20.L

1D
0.00%
1M
0.15%
YTD
9.02%
6M
8.55%
1Y
16.87%
3Y*
11.65%
5Y*
6.01%
10Y*
8.18%

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)

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UB20.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		9.02%12.00%6.98%-0.10%5.26%5.29%3.52%14.10%-5.54%14.53%
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 UB20.L and EMAS.L is 0.53, 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

0.53

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

0.64

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

0.66

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 28, 2012

0.75

Over the past year, the correlation between UB20.L and EMAS.L has dropped to 0.53 - well below their long-term average of 0.75, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
UB20.L
EMAS.L

Financial Services

45.1%
13.2%

Basic Materials

16.3%
3.3%

Industrials

8.5%
6.5%

Real Estate

7.8%
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
9.6%

Utilities

3.5%
1.3%

Healthcare

3.3%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
2.1%

Energy

2.7%
2.4%

Communication Services

2.6%
6.1%

Technology

1.0%
52.1%

Financial Services

UB20.L
45.1%
EMAS.L
13.2%

Basic Materials

UB20.L
16.3%
EMAS.L
3.3%

Industrials

UB20.L
8.5%
EMAS.L
6.5%

Real Estate

UB20.L
7.8%
EMAS.L
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

UB20.L
6.3%
EMAS.L
9.6%

Utilities

UB20.L
3.5%
EMAS.L
1.3%

Healthcare

UB20.L
3.3%
EMAS.L
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

UB20.L
3.0%
EMAS.L
2.1%

Energy

UB20.L
2.7%
EMAS.L
2.4%

Communication Services

UB20.L
2.6%
EMAS.L
6.1%

Technology

UB20.L
1.0%
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.

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis

SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF

Often compared with UB20.L:
UB20.L vs. EQQQ.LUB20.L vs. XKS2.LUB20.L vs. UC44.LUB20.L vs. FRIN.LUB20.L vs. ASDV.LUB20.L vs. HMEF.LUB20.L vs. PADV.L
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

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
UB20.L
UB20.L Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
UB20.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UB20.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
UB20.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
UB20.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
UB20.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.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.

UB20.LEMAS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.50
2.85

-1.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.22
7.46

-5.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

2.09

-0.81

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.29

10.86

-8.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.64

35.46

-28.82

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UB20.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is lower than the EMAS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UB20.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

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UB20.L drawdown since its inception was -32.34%, smaller than the maximum EMAS.L drawdown of -53.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UB20.L and EMAS.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

UB20.LEMAS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.34%

-53.67%

+21.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.32%

-11.14%

+3.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.80%

-25.14%

+7.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.80%

-29.16%

+11.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.34%

-34.79%

+2.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.91%

0.00%

-2.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.50%

-22.16%

+15.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.54%

3.42%

-0.88%

Volatility

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.L) is 3.80%, while SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (EMAS.L) has a volatility of 33.13%. This indicates that UB20.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

UB20.LEMAS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.80%

33.13%

-29.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.91%

35.89%

-26.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.22%

42.41%

-31.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.00%

28.52%

-14.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.76%

24.30%

-8.54%

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UB20.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than EMAS.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

UB20.L vs. EMAS.L - Dividend Comparison

UB20.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.92%, 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%
UB20.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		2.92%3.86%3.26%3.96%3.66%2.60%3.05%4.08%4.33%3.43%4.00%5.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

UB20.L and EMAS.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, UB20.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UB20.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAS.L.

UB20.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: UBS and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for UB20.L and 0.55% for EMAS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UB20.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