Screener
MINV vs EEMA
Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF vs iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF
Key differences
- EEMA costs 0.30% less per year.
- EEMA is significantly larger than MINV — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- MINV covers asia pacific markets; EEMA covers emerging markets.
- MINV follows a active selection strategy; EEMA uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, MINV has delivered higher annualized returns.
- EEMA has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| MINV | EEMA | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.79% | 0.49% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $143M | $1.3B |
| Since | 2022 | 2012 |
| Dividend yield | 1.14% | 1.28% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | asia pacific | emerging markets |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +81.1% | +46.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +31.9% | +22.4% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +7.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.21 | 0.95 |
| Volatility 1Y | 24.43% | 19.95% |
| Max drawdown | -23.49% | -44.18% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to MINV and EEMA
Explore further