DFEM vs. EMM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DFEM (Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF) and EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFEM returned 23.24%/yr vs 22.67%/yr for EMM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFEM charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMM.

Performance

DFEM vs. EMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). 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 lower than EMM's 32.97% return.

DFEM

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

EMM

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: 10.12%
• YTD: 32.97%
• 6M: 38.50%
• 1Y: 63.51%
• 3Y*: 22.67%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFEM vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	25.59%	29.51%	7.53%	8.55%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	32.97%	30.21%	2.34%	3.40%

Correlation

The correlation between DFEM and EMM is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2023	0.87

The correlation between DFEM and EMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFEM vs. EMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFEM	EMM
Technology	32.9%	45.5%
Financial Services	15.4%	25.0%
Industrials	11.9%	5.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	2.7%
Basic Materials	8.4%	3.9%
Communication Services	5.5%	2.7%
Energy	4.4%	4.8%
Healthcare	3.8%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	5.1%
Utilities	2.2%	1.2%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.8%

Return for Risk

DFEM vs. EMM — 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

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 85
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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. EMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). 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	EMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	2.94	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.54	3.79	-0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.52	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	4.33	-0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.33	18.13	-1.80
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. EMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the EMM Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFEM and EMM, 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	EMM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	2.94	-0.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	1.17	-0.26

Drawdowns

DFEM vs. EMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFEM drawdown since its inception was -20.82%, smaller than the maximum EMM drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFEM and EMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFEM	EMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.82%	-21.99%	+1.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.12%	-14.75%	+2.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.09%	-21.99%	+3.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.28%	-1.15%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.03%	-4.68%	-0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.09%	3.51%	-0.42%

Volatility

DFEM vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) is 7.78%, while Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a volatility of 9.79%. This indicates that DFEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFEM	EMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.78%	9.79%	-2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.02%	19.28%	-3.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.45%	21.69%	-3.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.26%	18.83%	-1.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.26%	18.83%	-1.57%

DFEM vs. EMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFEM has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than EMM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFEM vs. EMM - Dividend Comparison

DFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.82%, more than EMM's 0.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	1.82%	2.32%	2.50%	2.38%	1.99%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.67%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFEM and EMM in my portfolio?

DFEM and EMM have a correlation of 0.90, 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 EMM?

EMM has higher volatility (9.79%) compared to DFEM (7.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFEM dropped -20.82% vs EMM's -21.99%.

Which ETF is better, DFEM or EMM?

On 3-year performance, DFEM leads with 23.24% vs 22.67% for EMM. On fees, DFEM is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, DFEM has been the lower-risk option at 7.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFEM or EMM?

Over the 3-year period, DFEM has performed better with a 23.24% return vs 22.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFEM or EMM?

DFEM is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMM.

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

DFEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.82%, compared with 0.67% for EMM.

What is the main difference between DFEM and EMM?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for DFEM and 0.75% for EMM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 2.74), 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.