ADIV
Price
$18.90
Change
-$0.38 (-1.97%)
Updated
Jun 23, 01:46 PM (EDT)
Net Assets
55.85M
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
AIA
Price
$139.41
Change
-$10.76 (-7.17%)
Updated
Jun 23, 03:58 PM (EDT)
Net Assets
5.44B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

ADIV vs AIA

ADIV vs AIA Comparison Chart in %
loading
loading
View a ticker or compare two or three

Which ETF would AI Choose? Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) vs. iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA)

Key Takeaways

  • Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) employs an active strategy focused on high-quality dividend-growing companies across the Asia-Pacific region, resulting in a concentrated portfolio of approximately 37 holdings and a higher expense ratio of 0.78%.
  • iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) is a passive fund tracking the S&P Asia 50 Capped Index, providing broad exposure to 50 of the largest equities from Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan with a lower expense ratio of 0.50%.
  • Structural differences include active dividend selection in ADIV versus market-cap-weighted mega-cap exposure in AIA, leading to distinct risk profiles and sector tilts.
  • AIA exhibits heavier concentration in information technology, while ADIV emphasizes dividend sustainability across multiple sectors.
  • Both ETFs target Asia-Pacific growth themes but differ in cost efficiency, diversification breadth, and management approach, influencing their suitability for varying investor objectives.
  • Liquidity and structural characteristics favor AIA due to its larger scale and established index-tracking methodology.

Introduction

Investors seeking Asia-Pacific equity exposure often evaluate funds with complementary yet differentiated approaches to regional growth. Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) and iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) do not compete directly but offer alternative strategies targeting similar investor goals of participating in Asia's economic expansion. ADIV focuses on dividend builders through active selection, while AIA delivers passive access to leading large-cap names. This comparison highlights their structural distinctions, exposure profiles, and positioning amid evolving regional dynamics.

Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) Overview

The Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) is an actively managed exchange-traded fund designed to provide exposure to high-quality dividend growers in the Asia-Pacific region. It does not track a specific index but follows a proprietary strategy emphasizing companies with sustainable dividend growth potential. The fund typically holds around 37 securities, allowing for concentrated positions in select issuers. Top holdings reflect a focus on dividend payers across countries such as Taiwan, South Korea, and others in the region. Sector allocations tend to balance technology, financials, and consumer-oriented industries. The expense ratio stands at 0.78%, reflecting active management costs. As a traditional exchange-traded fund structure, it offers daily liquidity and standard rebalancing driven by the adviser's ongoing security selection rather than mechanical index rules.

iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) Overview

The iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) is a passively managed fund that seeks to track the performance of the S&P Asia 50 Capped Index. This index comprises 50 of the largest equities from Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. The ETF holds approximately 50 to 55 securities, with significant concentration in the top holdings such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing and Samsung Electronics. Sector allocations are dominated by information technology, followed by financials and consumer discretionary. The expense ratio is 0.50%, consistent with its passive, rules-based methodology. The fund employs market-capitalization weighting with capping constraints and rebalances periodically according to index methodology. Its exchange-traded structure supports high liquidity and transparent daily holdings disclosure.

Industry and Thematic Backdrop

The Asia-Pacific equity market encompasses dynamic economies driven by technology innovation, manufacturing strength, and expanding consumer bases. Key macroeconomic drivers include regional trade flows, monetary policy shifts in major Asian economies, and global supply-chain realignments. Capital flows into the region often respond to earnings cycles in technology and financial sectors, as well as broader interest-rate expectations. Regulatory developments around data security, cross-border investment, and corporate governance continue to shape the landscape. Sector risks encompass geopolitical tensions, currency fluctuations, and varying economic growth rates across individual markets. Both ETFs provide avenues to access these themes, though through differing lenses of active dividend focus versus broad large-cap representation.

Performance and Positioning Comparison

In recent market cycles, the active dividend-selection approach of Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) has positioned it to capture income-oriented opportunities amid sector rotations favoring stable payers. In contrast, the passive mega-cap tilt of iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has aligned more closely with momentum in technology leaders during earnings expansion phases. Relative positioning reflects AIA's sensitivity to information-technology cycles and ADIV's emphasis on dividend consistency across broader sectors. Volatility differences arise from ADIV's concentrated active holdings versus AIA's diversified index construction, influencing behavior during macroeconomic shifts or commodity-related trends affecting the region.

AI Screener

Tickeron’s AI Screener is an AI-powered stock and ETF discovery tool that helps traders and investors filter the market based on technical patterns, fundamentals, trends, volatility, and AI-driven signals. Users can scan thousands of stocks and ETFs using customizable filters such as industry, market capitalization, technical indicators, price patterns, and performance metrics. The screener helps identify trade ideas, trending stocks, breakout candidates, and market opportunities more efficiently than manual screening. Investors comparing ETFs like ADIV and AIA can leverage the tool to refine their analysis further.

Tickeron AI Verdict

Based on observable factors such as lower expense ratio, broader passive diversification, established index methodology, and scale, Tickeron’s AI would currently assign a higher probability of structural favorability to iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) for investors prioritizing cost efficiency and large-cap regional exposure. Guinness Atkinson Asia Pacific Dividend Builder ETF (ADIV) may appeal in scenarios emphasizing active dividend growth selection. This assessment draws from structural strength, diversification profile, and risk exposure considerations without constituting investment advice.

Disclaimer

The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.

Disclaimers and Limitations

VS
ADIV vs. AIA commentary
Jun 23, 2026

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is ADIV is a Hold and AIA is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
AIA has more net assets: 5.44B vs. ADIV (55.8M). AIA has a higher annual dividend yield than ADIV: AIA (54.571) vs ADIV (8.012). ADIV was incepted earlier than AIA: ADIV (20 years) vs AIA (19 years). AIA (0.50) has a lower expense ratio than ADIV (0.78). AIA has a higher turnover ADIV (18.13) vs ADIV (18.13).
ADIVAIAADIV / AIA
Gain YTD8.01254.57115%
Net Assets55.8M5.44B1%
Total Expense Ratio0.780.50156%
Turnover18.1325.0073%
Yield2.691.09246%
Fund Existence20 years19 years-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
ADIVAIA
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
78%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
79%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
77%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
83%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
86%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
86%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
87%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 7 days ago
79%
Bearish Trend 14 days ago
83%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
85%
Bearish Trend 2 days ago
81%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
80%
Bullish Trend 2 days ago
90%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
ADIV
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
AIA
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
XSHQ47.090.17
+0.36%
Invesco S&P SmallCap Quality ETF
DECU29.13-0.12
-0.41%
AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 UncDecETF
VTP76.29-0.32
-0.41%
Vanguard Total Inflation Protd Secs ETF
NUV9.12-0.04
-0.44%
Nuveen Municipal Value Fund
OILD49.34-2.10
-4.08%
MicroSectorsTM Ol&Gs E&P -3X Inv Lg ETNs

ADIV and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, ADIV has been loosely correlated with TSM. These tickers have moved in lockstep 62% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if ADIV jumps, then TSM could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To ADIV
1D Price
Change %
ADIV100%
+0.21%
TSM - ADIV
62%
Loosely correlated
+1.20%
AVGO - ADIV
50%
Loosely correlated
-4.52%
QCOM - ADIV
43%
Loosely correlated
-1.86%
NTES - ADIV
38%
Loosely correlated
+0.20%
AFL - ADIV
1%
Poorly correlated
+0.94%