DBEM vs. EMOP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DBEM (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF) and EMOP (AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. DBEM is passively managed, while EMOP is actively managed. Over the past year, DBEM returned 54.61% vs 47.69% for EMOP. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DBEM charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for EMOP.

Performance

DBEM vs. EMOP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with DBEM having a 27.92% return and EMOP slightly lower at 27.21%.

DBEM

• 1D: -5.21%
• 1M: 2.97%
• YTD: 27.92%
• 6M: 28.44%
• 1Y: 54.61%
• 3Y*: 24.78%
• 5Y*: 9.17%
• 10Y*: 10.69%

EMOP

• 1D: -4.78%
• 1M: 1.88%
• YTD: 27.21%
• 6M: 28.58%
• 1Y: 47.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DBEM vs. EMOP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DBEM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF	27.92%	21.07%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	27.21%	16.48%

Correlation

The correlation between DBEM and EMOP is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.91

The correlation between DBEM and EMOP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

DBEM vs. EMOP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DBEM	EMOP
Technology	43.6%	30.3%
Financial Services	17.9%	24.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	7.8%
Industrials	6.7%	8.1%
Communication Services	6.1%	12.3%
Basic Materials	6.0%	7.0%
Energy	3.5%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	1.4%
Healthcare	2.5%	1.6%
Utilities	1.8%	2.8%
Real Estate	1.0%	2.3%

Return for Risk

DBEM vs. EMOP — Risk / Return Rank

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

DBEM

DBEM Risk / Return Rank: 87
DBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
DBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
DBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 86
DBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
DBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 90

EMOP

EMOP Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EMOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
EMOP Omega Ratio Rank: 78
EMOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EMOP Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

DBEM vs. EMOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). 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.

	DBEM	EMOP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	2.21	+0.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	2.81	+0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.41	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.22	3.72	+1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.15	13.88	+5.26

DBEM vs. EMOP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DBEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is comparable to the EMOP Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DBEM and EMOP, 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

DBEM vs. EMOP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DBEM drawdown since its inception was -33.51%, which is greater than EMOP's maximum drawdown of -12.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBEM and EMOP.

Drawdown Indicators

	DBEM	EMOP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.51%	-12.88%	-20.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.51%	-12.88%	+2.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.48%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.21%	-4.78%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.66%	-2.00%	-9.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	3.44%	-0.58%

Volatility

DBEM vs. EMOP - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) has a higher volatility of 11.58% compared to AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP) at 10.76%. This indicates that DBEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMOP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DBEM	EMOP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.58%	10.76%	+0.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.66%	19.59%	-0.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.69%	21.65%	-0.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.70%	21.57%	-3.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.39%	21.57%	-4.18%

DBEM vs. EMOP - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBEM has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than EMOP's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

DBEM vs. EMOP - Dividend Comparison

DBEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.06%, more than EMOP's 0.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DBEM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF	2.06%	1.84%	2.48%	2.55%	2.65%	1.77%	1.74%	2.59%	2.85%	1.51%	1.59%	3.49%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	0.85%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DBEM and EMOP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, DBEM and EMOP 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, DBEM or EMOP?

DBEM has higher volatility (11.58%) compared to EMOP (10.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBEM dropped -33.51% vs EMOP's -12.88%.

Which ETF is better, DBEM or EMOP?

On 1-year performance, DBEM leads with 54.61% vs 47.69% for EMOP. On fees, DBEM is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, EMOP has been the lower-risk option at 10.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DBEM or EMOP?

Over the 1-year period, DBEM has performed better with a 54.61% return vs 47.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DBEM or EMOP?

DBEM is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for EMOP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DBEM or EMOP?

DBEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.06%, compared with 0.85% for EMOP.

What is the main difference between DBEM and EMOP?

They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for DBEM and 0.70% for EMOP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 2.21), 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.