DFEM vs. DFAC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DFEM (Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF) and DFAC (Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Dimensional, while DFAC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFEM returned 23.24%/yr vs 20.56%/yr for DFAC. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DFEM charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for DFAC.

Performance

DFEM vs. DFAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFEM achieves a 25.59% return, which is significantly higher than DFAC's 11.90% return.

DFEM

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: 6.85%
• YTD: 25.59%
• 6M: 27.96%
• 1Y: 50.40%
• 3Y*: 23.24%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DFAC

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 4.57%
• YTD: 11.90%
• 6M: 12.19%
• 1Y: 28.89%
• 3Y*: 20.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFEM vs. DFAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	25.59%	29.51%	7.53%	13.91%	-8.69%
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	11.90%	15.66%	19.61%	21.96%	-4.36%

Correlation

The correlation between DFEM and DFAC is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2022	0.67

The correlation between DFEM and DFAC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFEM vs. DFAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFEM	DFAC
Technology	32.9%	28.4%
Financial Services	15.4%	14.4%
Industrials	11.9%	12.8%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	10.7%
Basic Materials	8.4%	3.2%
Communication Services	5.5%	8.4%
Energy	4.4%	5.9%
Healthcare	3.8%	9.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	4.9%
Utilities	2.2%	1.9%
Real Estate	2.0%	0.2%

Return for Risk

DFEM vs. DFAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFEM

DFEM Risk / Return Rank: 81
DFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
DFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
DFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 82
DFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
DFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

DFAC

DFAC Risk / Return Rank: 71
DFAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
DFAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
DFAC Omega Ratio Rank: 70
DFAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
DFAC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

DFEM vs. DFAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC). 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.

	DFEM	DFAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	2.39	+0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.54	3.31	+0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.43	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	3.42	+0.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.33	15.17	+1.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFEM vs. DFAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the DFAC Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFEM and DFAC, 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

	DFEM	DFAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	2.39	+0.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.71	+0.21

Drawdowns

DFEM vs. DFAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFEM drawdown since its inception was -20.82%, smaller than the maximum DFAC drawdown of -23.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFEM and DFAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFEM	DFAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.82%	-23.12%	+2.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.12%	-8.49%	-3.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.09%	-20.02%	+1.93%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.28%	-0.67%	-0.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.03%	-5.45%	+0.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.09%	1.91%	+1.18%

Volatility

DFEM vs. DFAC - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) has a higher volatility of 7.78% compared to Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF (DFAC) at 3.01%. This indicates that DFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFEM	DFAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.78%	3.01%	+4.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.02%	8.96%	+7.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.45%	12.15%	+6.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.26%	17.13%	+0.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.26%	17.13%	+0.13%

DFEM vs. DFAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFEM has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than DFAC's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFEM vs. DFAC - Dividend Comparison

DFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.82%, more than DFAC's 0.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DFAC Dimensional U.S. Core Equity 2 ETF	0.91%	0.97%	1.03%	1.20%	1.50%	0.88%
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	1.82%	2.32%	2.50%	2.38%	1.99%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFEM and DFAC in my portfolio?

DFEM and DFAC have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFEM or DFAC?

DFEM has higher volatility (7.78%) compared to DFAC (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFEM dropped -20.82% vs DFAC's -23.12%.

Which ETF is better, DFEM or DFAC?

On 3-year performance, DFEM leads with 23.24% vs 20.56% for DFAC. On fees, DFAC is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, DFAC has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFEM or DFAC?

Over the 3-year period, DFEM has performed better with a 23.24% return vs 20.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFEM or DFAC?

DFAC is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for DFEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFEM or DFAC?

DFEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.82%, compared with 0.91% for DFAC.

What is the main difference between DFEM and DFAC?

DFEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while DFAC is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for DFEM and 0.17% for DFAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.39), 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.