I get how it's helpful and why for many cases.
But I strongly suspect that, all other things being equal, the obviously Asian settings (or whatever) would get tipped as being "more" ownvoices than something like mine.
You're probably right, though as I understand it, it's only own voices if one is writing about a culture and cultural experience the author actually shares. I don't think a story set in (or inspired by), say, Yuan Dynasty China, for instance, is any more own voices when written by a modern American of Chinese descent than a story set in Medieval England would be if I wrote it. Not unless there is a particular, transcendent experience that they author shares with the story's protagonist. Obviously, no one alive today has experienced living in a historical time period or can fully internalize the cultural norms of that period, even if they are a descendant. I think own voices is more about direct experiences than cultural settings.
This doesn't mean someone who is of Chinese descent wouldn't be able to bring a different perspective to a work of HF of their own cultural heritage than I could, though. And of course, there have been far more well-known books written about European history, and about the history of other countries and cultures too, by people who are of European heritage than by people of different heritages. I think it's pretty well established that voices that aren't of British, or of European-American heritage are underrepresented in most genres, including SFF, even if it's not strictly what is meant by own voices.
I could be wrong about this, though. I've struggled to understand what it refers to, aside from specific modern situations, such as being an immigrant from a particular country or living with a particular disability or writing based on another specific and personal experience that tends to be under (or mis) represented in fiction. I also understand that the story should be focused on that experience or identity, and it shouldn't be incidental to the plot and character arc.