DEHP vs. EMSF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DEHP (Dimensional Emerging Markets High Profitability ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, DEHP returned 66.88% vs 63.33% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DEHP charges 0.41%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

DEHP vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Emerging Markets High Profitability ETF (DEHP) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DEHP achieves a 35.45% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 45.34% return.

DEHP

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: 10.85%
• YTD: 35.45%
• 6M: 39.02%
• 1Y: 66.88%
• 3Y*: 25.54%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMSF

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: 8.61%
• YTD: 45.34%
• 6M: 40.08%
• 1Y: 63.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DEHP vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DEHP Dimensional Emerging Markets High Profitability ETF	35.45%	32.86%	4.47%	5.93%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	45.34%	19.20%	-3.09%	1.88%

Correlation

The correlation between DEHP and EMSF 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 Sep 25, 2023	0.89

The correlation between DEHP and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

DEHP vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DEHP	EMSF
Technology	41.3%	43.6%
Communication Services	11.4%	2.0%
Industrials	11.4%	15.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	7.7%
Basic Materials	7.7%	-
Financial Services	6.5%	16.6%
Energy	5.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	3.9%
Healthcare	2.5%	6.8%
Utilities	0.6%	2.8%
Real Estate	0.4%	1.6%

Return for Risk

DEHP vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

DEHP

DEHP Risk / Return Rank: 89
DEHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
DEHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
DEHP Omega Ratio Rank: 89
DEHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
DEHP Martin Ratio Rank: 90

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 72
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

DEHP vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets High Profitability ETF (DEHP) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

	DEHP	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.21	2.51	+0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.11	3.14	+0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.43	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.11	4.37	+0.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.55	14.61	+5.94
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DEHP vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DEHP Sharpe Ratio is 3.21, which is comparable to the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DEHP and EMSF, 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

	DEHP	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.21	2.51	+0.70
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.98	-0.06

Drawdowns

DEHP vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DEHP drawdown since its inception was -22.90%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DEHP and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	DEHP	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.90%	-24.75%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.16%	-14.57%	+1.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.18%	-1.10%	-0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.75%	-5.72%	-0.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.26%	4.35%	-1.09%

Volatility

DEHP vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional Emerging Markets High Profitability ETF (DEHP) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) have volatilities of 9.93% and 9.96%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DEHP	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.93%	9.96%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.56%	21.98%	-3.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.97%	25.35%	-4.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.62%	22.75%	-4.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.62%	22.75%	-4.13%

DEHP vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

DEHP has a 0.41% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

DEHP vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

DEHP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%, more than EMSF's 1.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DEHP Dimensional Emerging Markets High Profitability ETF	1.32%	1.73%	2.44%	2.84%	1.65%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.30%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DEHP and EMSF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, DEHP and EMSF 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, DEHP or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (9.96%) compared to DEHP (9.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DEHP dropped -22.90% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, DEHP or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, DEHP leads with 66.88% vs 63.33% for EMSF. On fees, DEHP is cheaper at 0.41% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DEHP or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, DEHP has performed better with a 66.88% return vs 63.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DEHP or EMSF?

DEHP is cheaper with a 0.41% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DEHP or EMSF?

DEHP has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 1.30% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between DEHP and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.41% for DEHP and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DEHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.21 vs 2.51), 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.