PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DFEM vs. DGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DFEM vs. DGS - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFEM achieves a 25.59% return, which is significantly higher than DGS's 14.53% return.


DFEM

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

DGS

1D
-1.37%
1M
2.58%
YTD
14.53%
6M
15.57%
1Y
27.26%
3Y*
16.17%
5Y*
7.85%
10Y*
9.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DFEM vs. DGS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
DFEM
Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF
25.59%29.51%7.53%13.91%-8.69%
DGS
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund
14.53%21.18%1.13%19.08%-7.64%

Correlation

The correlation between DFEM and DGS is 0.91, 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

0.91

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2022

0.92

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

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

DFEM vs. DGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFEM
DFEM Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
DFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
DFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

DGS
DGS Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
DGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGS Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
DGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGS Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
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. DGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund (DGS). 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.


DFEMDGSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.32

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.18

2.72

+1.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.33

9.16

+7.18

DFEM vs. DGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is higher than the DGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFEM and DGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DFEMDGSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

1.76

+0.99

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.58

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.92

0.23

+0.69

Drawdowns

DFEM vs. DGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFEM drawdown since its inception was -20.82%, smaller than the maximum DGS drawdown of -61.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFEM and DGS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DFEMDGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.82%

-61.83%

+41.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.12%

-10.06%

-2.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.09%

-19.31%

+1.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.86%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.28%

-1.40%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.03%

-12.59%

+7.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.09%

2.98%

+0.11%

Volatility

DFEM vs. DGS - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) has a higher volatility of 7.78% compared to WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund (DGS) at 5.24%. This indicates that DFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DFEMDGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.78%

5.24%

+2.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.02%

13.03%

+2.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.45%

15.56%

+2.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.26%

14.87%

+2.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.26%

17.32%

-0.06%

DFEM vs. DGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFEM has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than DGS's 0.58% expense ratio.


Dividends

DFEM vs. DGS - Dividend Comparison

DFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.82%, less than DGS's 3.21% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DFEM
Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF
1.82%2.32%2.50%2.38%1.99%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
DGS
WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund
3.21%3.45%3.36%4.55%5.34%3.98%3.69%3.95%4.24%2.81%3.42%3.28%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, DFEM and DGS 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.

DFEM has higher volatility (7.78%) compared to DGS (5.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFEM dropped -20.82% vs DGS's -61.83%.

On 3-year performance, DFEM leads with 23.24% vs 16.17% for DGS. On fees, DFEM is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, DGS has been the lower-risk option at 5.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, DFEM has performed better with a 23.24% return vs 16.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DFEM is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for DGS.

DGS has the higher dividend yield at 3.21%, compared with 1.82% for DFEM.

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for DFEM and 0.58% for DGS.

DFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 1.76), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DFEM and DGS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer