DFSE vs. EMDM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DFSE (Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF) and EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. DFSE is actively managed, while EMDM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, DFSE returned 21.00%/yr vs 32.95%/yr for EMDM. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFSE charges 0.41%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMDM.

Performance

DFSE vs. EMDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFSE achieves a 21.02% return, which is significantly lower than EMDM's 39.03% return.

DFSE

• 1D: -1.66%
• 1M: 5.84%
• YTD: 21.02%
• 6M: 22.69%
• 1Y: 42.80%
• 3Y*: 21.00%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMDM

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: 11.04%
• YTD: 39.03%
• 6M: 45.21%
• 1Y: 91.32%
• 3Y*: 32.95%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFSE vs. EMDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFSE Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF	21.02%	28.22%	6.90%	8.71%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	39.03%	59.68%	-4.93%	14.21%

Correlation

The correlation between DFSE and EMDM is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.86

The correlation between DFSE and EMDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFSE vs. EMDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFSE	EMDM
Technology	31.2%	32.1%
Financial Services	13.9%	27.2%
Industrials	12.5%	3.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	6.0%
Basic Materials	6.2%	15.1%
Communication Services	5.8%	4.3%
Healthcare	4.7%	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	3.4%
Real Estate	2.2%	-
Utilities	1.8%	1.9%
Energy	1.0%	6.3%

Return for Risk

DFSE vs. EMDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFSE

DFSE Risk / Return Rank: 69
DFSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
DFSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
DFSE Omega Ratio Rank: 71
DFSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
DFSE Martin Ratio Rank: 68

EMDM

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

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.

DFSE vs. EMDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). 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.

	DFSE	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	3.92	-1.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	4.56	-1.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.66	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	5.87	-2.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.45	24.30	-11.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFSE vs. EMDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFSE Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is lower than the EMDM Sharpe Ratio of 3.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFSE and EMDM, 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

	DFSE	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.30	3.92	-1.62
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.34	1.58	-0.24

Drawdowns

DFSE vs. EMDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFSE drawdown since its inception was -19.77%, which is greater than EMDM's maximum drawdown of -18.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFSE and EMDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFSE	EMDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.77%	-18.81%	-0.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.88%	-15.65%	+2.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.77%	-18.81%	-0.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-1.32%	-0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-4.07%	+0.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.45%	3.77%	-0.32%

Volatility

DFSE vs. EMDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) is 7.93%, while First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) has a volatility of 9.61%. This indicates that DFSE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFSE	EMDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.93%	9.61%	-1.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.13%	20.78%	-4.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.72%	23.42%	-4.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.63%	19.79%	-2.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.63%	19.79%	-2.16%

DFSE vs. EMDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFSE has a 0.41% expense ratio, which is lower than EMDM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFSE vs. EMDM - Dividend Comparison

DFSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, less than EMDM's 2.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFSE Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF	1.84%	2.26%	2.06%	2.06%	0.36%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.57%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFSE and EMDM in my portfolio?

DFSE and EMDM have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFSE or EMDM?

EMDM has higher volatility (9.61%) compared to DFSE (7.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFSE dropped -19.77% vs EMDM's -18.81%.

Which ETF is better, DFSE or EMDM?

On 3-year performance, EMDM leads with 32.95% vs 21.00% for DFSE. On fees, DFSE is cheaper at 0.41% per year. On volatility, DFSE has been the lower-risk option at 7.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFSE or EMDM?

Over the 3-year period, EMDM has performed better with a 32.95% return vs 21.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFSE or EMDM?

DFSE is cheaper with a 0.41% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMDM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFSE or EMDM?

EMDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.57%, compared with 1.84% for DFSE.

What is the main difference between DFSE and EMDM?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.41% for DFSE and 0.75% for EMDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.92 vs 2.30), 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.