BKEM vs. BKDV

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and BKDV (BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BKEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index, while BKDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by BNY Mellon. BKEM is passively managed, while BKDV is actively managed. Over the past year, BKEM returned 36.20% vs 31.37% for BKDV. Their 0.49 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BKEM charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for BKDV.

Performance

BKEM vs. BKDV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKEM achieves a 19.61% return, which is significantly higher than BKDV's 18.37% return.

BKEM

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: -2.18%
• 6M: 9.90%
• YTD: 19.61%
• 1Y: 36.20%
• 3Y*: 19.15%
• 5Y*: 6.90%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.53%

BKDV

• 1D: 1.00%
• 1M: 1.93%
• 6M: 12.42%
• YTD: 18.37%
• 1Y: 31.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.82%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	$13.25M	$13.47M	$12.30M
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$481.37K	$317.95K	$245.58K

BKEM vs. BKDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	19.61%	30.55%	-3.74%
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	18.37%	18.58%	-0.91%

Correlation

The correlation between BKEM and BKDV is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2024	0.49

The correlation between BKEM and BKDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKEM vs. BKDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BKEM	BKDV
Technology	44.5%	16.0%
Financial Services	17.5%	21.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	9.9%
Industrials	7.6%	11.8%
Communication Services	5.8%	5.7%
Basic Materials	5.4%	3.4%
Energy	3.1%	7.0%
Healthcare	2.7%	14.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	7.5%
Utilities	2.0%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.1%

Return for Risk

BKEM vs. BKDV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BKEM

BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 64
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 64
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 64

BKDV

BKDV Risk / Return Rank: 93
BKDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
BKDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
BKDV Omega Ratio Rank: 92
BKDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
BKDV Martin Ratio Rank: 93

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BKEM vs. BKDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) and BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BKEM	BKDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	2.59	-1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	3.61	-1.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.46	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.62	4.74	-2.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.01	18.11	-10.10

BKEM vs. BKDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is lower than the BKDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKEM and BKDV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BKEM vs. BKDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKEM drawdown since its inception was -39.48%, which is greater than BKDV's maximum drawdown of -15.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKEM and BKDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKEM	BKDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.48%	-15.49%	-23.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.91%	-6.65%	-7.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.28%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.43%	0.00%	-9.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.75%	-2.23%	-13.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.53%	1.74%	+2.79%

Volatility

BKEM vs. BKDV - Volatility Comparison

BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a higher volatility of 9.11% compared to BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) at 3.04%. This indicates that BKEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BKDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKEM	BKDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.11%	3.04%	+6.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.78%	9.33%	+12.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.88%	12.17%	+11.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.61%	15.39%	+4.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.75%	15.39%	+4.36%

BKEM vs. BKDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKEM has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than BKDV's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKEM vs. BKDV - Dividend Comparison

BKEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, more than BKDV's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	0.52%	0.62%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.96%	2.25%	2.76%	3.02%	3.15%	2.22%	1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKEM and BKDV in my portfolio?

BKEM and BKDV have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BKEM or BKDV?

BKEM has higher volatility (9.11%) compared to BKDV (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKEM dropped -39.48% vs BKDV's -15.49%.

Which ETF is better, BKEM or BKDV?

On 1-year performance, BKEM leads with 36.20% vs 31.37% for BKDV. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, BKDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKEM or BKDV?

Over the 1-year period, BKEM has performed better with a 36.20% return vs 31.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKEM or BKDV?

BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BKDV.

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

BKEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.52% for BKDV.

What is the main difference between BKEM and BKDV?

BKEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while BKDV is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for BKEM and 0.60% for BKDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.53), 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.