BKEM vs. EMXC

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index while EMXC tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BKEM returned 6.67%/yr vs 11.85%/yr for EMXC. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BKEM charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.

Performance

BKEM vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKEM achieves a 22.14% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 32.80% return.

BKEM

• 1D: 1.71%
• 1M: -3.22%
• 6M: 16.09%
• YTD: 22.14%
• 1Y: 38.83%
• 3Y*: 19.62%
• 5Y*: 6.67%
• 10Y*: —

EMXC

• 1D: 1.79%
• 1M: -3.24%
• 6M: 26.73%
• YTD: 32.80%
• 1Y: 55.63%
• 3Y*: 24.38%
• 5Y*: 11.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

BKEM vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	22.14%	30.55%	7.53%	8.68%	-19.43%	-3.91%	48.44%
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	32.80%	35.14%	2.68%	18.96%	-19.56%	8.54%	53.16%

Correlation

The correlation between BKEM and EMXC is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 24, 2020	0.90

The correlation between BKEM and EMXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKEM vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BKEM	EMXC
Technology	43.0%	52.4%
Financial Services	16.9%	17.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	4.1%
Industrials	8.1%	6.9%
Communication Services	5.8%	3.0%
Basic Materials	5.7%	6.0%
Energy	3.4%	3.4%
Healthcare	2.7%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	2.4%
Utilities	2.0%	1.9%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.8%

Return for Risk

BKEM vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BKEM

BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 67
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 67
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 70

EMXC

EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 82
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

BKEM vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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	EMXC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.12	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.22	2.61	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.39	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	3.88	-0.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.09	13.40	-3.30

BKEM vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKEM and EMXC, 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. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKEM drawdown since its inception was -39.48%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKEM and EMXC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKEM	EMXC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.48%	-42.81%	+3.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.11%	-14.41%	+1.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.38%	-19.12%	+0.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.89%	-28.91%	-4.98%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.51%	-9.90%	+2.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.80%	-10.13%	-5.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.86%	4.16%	-0.30%

Volatility

BKEM vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) is 10.25%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 12.36%. This indicates that BKEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKEM	EMXC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.25%	12.36%	-2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.99%	24.76%	-3.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.93%	26.41%	-3.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.51%	18.73%	+0.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.65%	20.37%	-0.72%

BKEM vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKEM has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKEM vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

BKEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than EMXC's 2.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.92%	2.25%	2.76%	3.02%	3.15%	2.22%	1.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	2.00%	2.82%	2.69%	1.83%	2.85%	1.78%	1.45%	3.25%	2.63%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKEM and EMXC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BKEM and EMXC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, BKEM or EMXC?

EMXC has higher volatility (12.36%) compared to BKEM (10.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKEM dropped -39.48% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

Which ETF is better, BKEM or EMXC?

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 11.85% vs 6.67% for BKEM. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, BKEM has been the lower-risk option at 10.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKEM or EMXC?

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 11.85% return vs 6.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKEM or EMXC?

BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EMXC.

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

EMXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 1.92% for BKEM.

What is the main difference between BKEM and EMXC?

BKEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: BNY Mellon and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for BKEM and 0.49% for EMXC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.70), 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.