DFSE vs. EMM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DFSE (Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 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, DFSE returned 19.53%/yr vs 21.97%/yr for EMM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFSE charges 0.41%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMM.

Performance

DFSE vs. EMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) 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, DFSE achieves a 16.52% return, which is significantly lower than EMM's 30.43% return.

DFSE

• 1D: -5.29%
• 1M: -0.02%
• YTD: 16.52%
• 6M: 16.76%
• 1Y: 32.75%
• 3Y*: 19.53%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMM

• 1D: -5.60%
• 1M: 4.22%
• YTD: 30.43%
• 6M: 33.87%
• 1Y: 55.00%
• 3Y*: 21.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFSE vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFSE Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF	16.52%	28.22%	6.90%	10.80%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	30.43%	30.21%	2.34%	2.99%

Correlation

The correlation between DFSE and EMM 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	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2023	0.85

The correlation between DFSE and EMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DFSE vs. EMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFSE

DFSE Risk / Return Rank: 52
DFSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
DFSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
DFSE Omega Ratio Rank: 52
DFSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
DFSE Martin Ratio Rank: 56

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 76
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. EMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	DFSE	EMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	2.26	-0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.11	2.87	-0.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.42	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	3.75	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.16	15.03	-5.87

DFSE vs. EMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFSE Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is lower than the EMM Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFSE 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.

Drawdowns

DFSE vs. EMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFSE drawdown since its inception was -19.77%, smaller than the maximum EMM drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFSE and EMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFSE	EMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.77%	-21.99%	+2.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.88%	-14.75%	+1.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.77%	-21.99%	+2.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.31%	-5.60%	+0.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-4.67%	+0.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.58%	3.67%	-0.09%

Volatility

DFSE vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) is 11.07%, while Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a volatility of 13.10%. This indicates that DFSE 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

	DFSE	EMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.07%	13.10%	-2.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.87%	22.46%	-3.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.92%	24.51%	-3.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.24%	19.83%	-1.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.24%	19.83%	-1.59%

DFSE vs. EMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

DFSE vs. EMM - Dividend Comparison

DFSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, more than EMM's 0.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFSE Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF	1.91%	2.26%	2.06%	2.06%	0.36%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.69%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFSE and EMM in my portfolio?

DFSE and EMM 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 EMM?

EMM has higher volatility (13.10%) compared to DFSE (11.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFSE dropped -19.77% vs EMM's -21.99%.

Which ETF is better, DFSE or EMM?

On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 21.97% vs 19.53% for DFSE. On fees, DFSE is cheaper at 0.41% per year. On volatility, DFSE has been the lower-risk option at 11.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFSE or EMM?

Over the 3-year period, EMM has performed better with a 21.97% return vs 19.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFSE or EMM?

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

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

DFSE has the higher dividend yield at 1.91%, compared with 0.69% for EMM.

What is the main difference between DFSE and EMM?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.41% for DFSE and 0.75% for EMM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 1.58), 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.