CWO.NEO vs. EMGF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWO.NEO (iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF) and EMGF (iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - CWO.NEO tracks the FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index while EMGF tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWO.NEO returned 11.43%/yr vs 12.29%/yr for EMGF. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CWO.NEO charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EMGF.

Performance

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

CWO.NEO is traded in CAD, while EMGF is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EMGF values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWO.NEO achieves a 13.80% return, which is significantly lower than EMGF's 31.66% return. Over the past 10 years, CWO.NEO has underperformed EMGF with an annualized return of 11.43%, while EMGF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.29% annualized return.

CWO.NEO

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: 4.14%
• YTD: 13.80%
• 6M: 13.05%
• 1Y: 35.32%
• 3Y*: 23.05%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: 11.43%

EMGF

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 11.84%
• YTD: 31.66%
• 6M: 32.01%
• 1Y: 57.32%
• 3Y*: 28.36%
• 5Y*: 13.53%
• 10Y*: 12.29%

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

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF	13.80%	26.34%	22.33%	9.56%	-9.03%	7.13%	-3.12%	10.86%	-0.29%	17.16%
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF	31.66%	25.38%	18.43%	8.42%	-10.60%	5.68%	8.40%	15.02%	-12.90%	33.30%

Correlation

The correlation between CWO.NEO and EMGF is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2015	0.60

The correlation between CWO.NEO and EMGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (all time) to 0.78 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWO.NEO

CWO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 68
CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CWO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
CWO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 72
CWO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
CWO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 68

EMGF

EMGF Risk / Return Rank: 81
EMGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EMGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
EMGF Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EMGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
EMGF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) and iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF). 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.

	CWO.NEO	EMGF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	3.00	-0.71
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	3.95	-0.89
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.56	-0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.26	4.81	-1.56
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.37	17.15	-4.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWO.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the EMGF Sharpe Ratio of 3.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWO.NEO and EMGF, 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

	CWO.NEO	EMGF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	3.00	-0.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70	0.88	-0.18
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66	0.71	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.64	-0.19

Drawdowns

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWO.NEO drawdown since its inception was -31.99%, roughly equal to the maximum EMGF drawdown of -32.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWO.NEO and EMGF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWO.NEO	EMGF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.99%	-32.11%	+0.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.90%	-11.96%	+1.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.12%	-14.37%	-2.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.80%	-22.61%	-2.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.97%	-32.11%	+0.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-0.79%	-0.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.29%	-8.06%	-2.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	3.35%	-0.49%

Volatility

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF (CWO.NEO) is 5.40%, while iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) has a volatility of 9.08%. This indicates that CWO.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWO.NEO	EMGF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.40%	9.08%	-3.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.46%	16.82%	-4.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.50%	19.19%	-3.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.65%	15.49%	+1.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.52%	17.33%	+0.19%

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWO.NEO has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than EMGF's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWO.NEO vs. EMGF - Dividend Comparison

CWO.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, more than EMGF's 1.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CWO.NEO iShares Emerging Markets Fundamental Index ETF	2.45%	2.79%	3.50%	4.14%	5.03%	4.61%	2.64%	3.01%	3.22%	2.60%	2.57%	3.23%
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF	1.94%	2.52%	3.42%	5.94%	4.04%	2.48%	1.95%	2.63%	2.73%	1.94%	2.04%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWO.NEO and EMGF in my portfolio?

CWO.NEO and EMGF have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CWO.NEO or EMGF?

On fees, EMGF is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CWO.NEO or EMGF?

EMGF is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for CWO.NEO.

What is the main difference between CWO.NEO and EMGF?

CWO.NEO tracks FTSE RAFI Emerging Markets Index, while EMGF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for CWO.NEO and 0.45% for EMGF.