DFEM vs. FRDM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DFEM (Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF) and FRDM (Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. DFEM is actively managed, while FRDM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFEM returned 23.24%/yr vs 37.08%/yr for FRDM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFEM charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FRDM.

Performance

DFEM vs. FRDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). 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 FRDM's 44.61% return.

DFEM

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

FRDM

• 1D: -1.30%
• 1M: 17.06%
• YTD: 44.61%
• 6M: 53.16%
• 1Y: 97.46%
• 3Y*: 37.08%
• 5Y*: 19.30%
• 10Y*: —

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

DFEM vs. FRDM - 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%
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	44.61%	61.27%	1.70%	22.77%	-6.92%

Correlation

The correlation between DFEM and FRDM 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	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2022	0.85

The correlation between DFEM and FRDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFEM vs. FRDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFEM	FRDM
Technology	32.9%	41.1%
Financial Services	15.4%	22.1%
Industrials	11.9%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	7.8%
Basic Materials	8.4%	7.4%
Communication Services	5.5%	3.9%
Energy	4.4%	0.1%
Healthcare	3.8%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	2.2%
Utilities	2.2%	2.6%
Real Estate	2.0%	2.5%

Return for Risk

DFEM vs. FRDM — 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

FRDM

FRDM Risk / Return Rank: 93
FRDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FRDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
FRDM Omega Ratio Rank: 93
FRDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
FRDM Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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. FRDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). 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	FRDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	4.00	-1.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.54	4.65	-1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.67	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	5.81	-1.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.33	23.37	-7.04
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. FRDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is lower than the FRDM Sharpe Ratio of 4.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFEM and FRDM, 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	FRDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	4.00	-1.25
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.93	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.85	+0.06

Drawdowns

DFEM vs. FRDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFEM drawdown since its inception was -20.82%, smaller than the maximum FRDM drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFEM and FRDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFEM	FRDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.82%	-40.49%	+19.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.12%	-16.87%	+4.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.09%	-16.87%	-1.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.28%	-1.30%	+0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.03%	-7.09%	+2.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.09%	4.18%	-1.09%

Volatility

DFEM vs. FRDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) is 7.78%, while Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM) has a volatility of 11.03%. This indicates that DFEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFEM	FRDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.78%	11.03%	-3.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.02%	21.65%	-5.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.45%	24.50%	-6.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.26%	20.80%	-3.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.26%	22.77%	-5.51%

DFEM vs. FRDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFEM has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than FRDM's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFEM vs. FRDM - Dividend Comparison

DFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.82%, more than FRDM's 1.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	1.82%	2.32%	2.50%	2.38%	1.99%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	1.51%	2.26%	2.53%	2.66%	2.72%	2.17%	1.11%	1.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFEM and FRDM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, DFEM and FRDM 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, DFEM or FRDM?

FRDM has higher volatility (11.03%) compared to DFEM (7.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFEM dropped -20.82% vs FRDM's -40.49%.

Which ETF is better, DFEM or FRDM?

On 3-year performance, FRDM leads with 37.08% vs 23.24% for DFEM. 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 FRDM?

Over the 3-year period, FRDM has performed better with a 37.08% return vs 23.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFEM or FRDM?

DFEM is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for FRDM.

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

DFEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.82%, compared with 1.51% for FRDM.

What is the main difference between DFEM and FRDM?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Freedom Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for DFEM and 0.49% for FRDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FRDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.00 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.