HRTS vs IAE
Tema Heart & Health ETF vs Voya Asia Pacific High Dividend Equity Income Fund
Which is better, HRTS or IAE?
IAE has been ahead.
HRTS has a lower expense ratio. IAE led over 1Y and the full window. IAE is less concentrated, with 38.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | HRTS | IAE |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75%Best | 1.21% |
| AUM | $57M | $95M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 8.68% |
| Holdings | 94 | 271 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.2%Best | 21.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -24.7% | -23.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.9 years | $14,035 | $16,951Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.2% | 38.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Tema Global Limited | Voya Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 20, 2023 | Mar 27, 2007 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized).
The two price series end 24 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. HRTS has data through Nov 6, 2026 and IAE through Oct 13, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 21, 2023 to Oct 13, 2026 (2.9 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IAE has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.3% compared with 17.2% for HRTS. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -24.7% for HRTS and -23.3% for IAE. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.09. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
HRTS charges 0.75% per year while IAE charges 1.21%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $121 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, HRTS currently yields 1.22% against 8.68% for IAE.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 46 holdings in HRTS and 248 in IAE, totalling 100.3% and 98.4% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 46 positions we hold weights for in HRTS and 248 in IAE, against full books of 94 and 271.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 7 positions for IAE that do not appear in our book for HRTS (3.4% of the fund), and 37 for HRTS that do not appear in IAE (82.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of HRTS and IAE you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, HRTS or IAE?
HRTS has an expense ratio of 0.75% while IAE charges 1.21%. HRTS is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, HRTS or IAE?
IAE has been the more volatile fund at 21.3% annualized versus 17.2% for HRTS. Worst drawdown: HRTS -24.7% vs IAE -23.3%.
Should I hold both HRTS and IAE?
HRTS and IAE have a monthly-return correlation of 0.09, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, HRTS or IAE?
HRTS yields 1.22% while IAE yields 8.68%, so IAE currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IAE better than HRTS?
HRTS has a lower expense ratio. IAE led over 1Y and the full window. IAE is less concentrated, with 38.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.