DGS vs. EMSF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DGS (WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. DGS is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, DGS returned 27.26% vs 65.26% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DGS charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

DGS vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund (DGS) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DGS achieves a 14.53% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 46.95% return.

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%

EMSF

• 1D: 1.74%
• 1M: 10.89%
• YTD: 46.95%
• 6M: 41.41%
• 1Y: 65.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DGS vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DGS WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund	14.53%	21.18%	1.13%	7.73%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	46.95%	19.20%	-3.09%	1.88%

Correlation

The correlation between DGS and EMSF is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2023	0.81

The correlation between DGS and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DGS vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

DGS

DGS Risk / Return Rank: 51
DGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
DGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
DGS Omega Ratio Rank: 50
DGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
DGS Martin Ratio Rank: 53

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 73
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

DGS vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund (DGS) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

	DGS	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.59	-0.83
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	3.22	-0.79
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.44	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	4.59	-1.87
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.16	15.38	-6.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DGS vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DGS Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is lower than the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DGS and EMSF, 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

	DGS	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.76	2.59	-0.83
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	0.23	1.00	-0.77

Drawdowns

DGS vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DGS drawdown since its inception was -61.83%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DGS and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	DGS	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.83%	-24.75%	-37.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.06%	-14.57%	+4.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.31%	—	—
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	-1.40%	0.00%	-1.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.59%	-5.73%	-6.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.98%	4.35%	-1.37%

Volatility

DGS vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree Emerging Markets SmallCap Dividend Fund (DGS) is 5.24%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 9.85%. This indicates that DGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DGS	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.24%	9.85%	-4.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.03%	21.95%	-8.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.56%	25.33%	-9.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.87%	22.75%	-7.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.32%	22.75%	-5.43%

DGS vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

DGS has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

DGS vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

DGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.21%, more than EMSF's 1.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.28%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DGS and EMSF in my portfolio?

DGS and EMSF have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DGS or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (9.85%) compared to DGS (5.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DGS dropped -61.83% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, DGS or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 65.26% vs 27.26% for DGS. On fees, DGS is cheaper at 0.58% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, DGS or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 65.26% return vs 27.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DGS or EMSF?

DGS is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DGS or EMSF?

DGS has the higher dividend yield at 3.21%, compared with 1.28% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between DGS and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for DGS and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 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.