BKCG vs. BKEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BKCG (BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BKCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by BNY Mellon, while BKEM is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. BKCG is actively managed, while BKEM is passively managed. Over the past year, BKCG returned 13.80% vs 57.21% for BKEM. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BKCG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.

Performance

BKCG vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKCG achieves a 4.02% return, which is significantly lower than BKEM's 30.24% return.

BKCG

• 1D: -1.19%
• 1M: 1.33%
• YTD: 4.02%
• 6M: 4.51%
• 1Y: 13.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BKEM

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: 8.75%
• YTD: 30.24%
• 6M: 32.64%
• 1Y: 57.21%
• 3Y*: 24.11%
• 5Y*: 7.37%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BKCG vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BKCG BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF	4.02%	18.56%
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	30.24%	26.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BKCG and BKEM is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	0.67

The correlation between BKCG and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKCG vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BKCG	BKEM
Technology	37.8%	35.9%
Financial Services	19.5%	18.9%
Communication Services	12.8%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	9.7%
Industrials	9.2%	9.0%
Healthcare	6.2%	3.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	2.9%
Basic Materials	-	6.4%
Energy	-	4.0%
Real Estate	-	1.2%
Utilities	-	2.3%

Return for Risk

BKCG vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BKCG

BKCG Risk / Return Rank: 29
BKCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
BKCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
BKCG Omega Ratio Rank: 29
BKCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
BKCG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

BKEM

BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 84
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BKCG vs. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	BKCG	BKEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	2.95	-1.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.51	3.83	-2.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.52	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.14	4.39	-3.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.65	16.85	-12.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BKCG vs. BKEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is lower than the BKEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKCG and BKEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BKCG	BKEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.05	2.95	-1.90
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.09	0.75	+0.34

Drawdowns

BKCG vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKCG drawdown since its inception was -12.12%, smaller than the maximum BKEM drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKCG and BKEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKCG	BKEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.12%	-39.48%	+27.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.12%	-13.11%	+0.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.09%	-0.95%	-1.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.97%	-16.00%	+14.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.97%	3.41%	-0.44%

Volatility

BKCG vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) is 3.38%, while BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a volatility of 8.10%. This indicates that BKCG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BKEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKCG	BKEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.38%	8.10%	-4.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.37%	16.75%	-6.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.19%	19.46%	-6.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.03%	18.73%	-0.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.03%	19.12%	-1.09%

BKCG vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKCG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKCG vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison

BKCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, less than BKEM's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BKCG BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF	0.78%	0.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.45%	2.25%	2.76%	3.02%	3.15%	2.22%	1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKCG and BKEM in my portfolio?

BKCG and BKEM have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BKCG or BKEM?

BKEM has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to BKCG (3.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKCG dropped -12.12% vs BKEM's -39.48%.

Which ETF is better, BKCG or BKEM?

On 1-year performance, BKEM leads with 57.21% vs 13.80% for BKCG. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, BKCG has been the lower-risk option at 3.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKCG or BKEM?

Over the 1-year period, BKEM has performed better with a 57.21% return vs 13.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKCG or BKEM?

BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BKCG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BKCG or BKEM?

BKEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 0.78% for BKCG.

What is the main difference between BKCG and BKEM?

BKCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BKEM is Asia Pacific Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BKCG and 0.11% for BKEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 1.05), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.