Screener
ADIV vs EEMA
Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF vs iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
Key differences
- EEMA costs 0.29% less per year.
- EEMA is significantly larger than ADIV — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- ADIV follows a active selection strategy; EEMA uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, EEMA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- ADIV has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| ADIV | EEMA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.78% | 0.49% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $55M | $1.3B |
| Since | 2006 | 2012 |
| Dividend yield | 2.78% | 1.28% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | emerging markets |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +19.2% | +46.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +17.1% | +22.4% |
| CAGR 5Y | +7.1% | +7.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.85 | 0.95 |
| Volatility 1Y | 13.26% | 19.95% |
| Max drawdown | -31.55% | -44.18% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to ADIV and EEMA
Explore further