PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ECON vs. FEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ECON vs. FEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) and First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECON achieves a 35.02% return, which is significantly higher than FEM's 20.43% return. Over the past 10 years, ECON has underperformed FEM with an annualized return of 6.10%, while FEM has yielded a comparatively higher 9.75% annualized return.


ECON

1D
-1.24%
1M
13.52%
YTD
35.02%
6M
38.26%
1Y
65.21%
3Y*
23.87%
5Y*
7.11%
10Y*
6.10%

FEM

1D
-1.38%
1M
-0.66%
YTD
20.43%
6M
22.40%
1Y
42.41%
3Y*
20.73%
5Y*
7.34%
10Y*
9.75%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ECON vs. FEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
35.02%34.15%0.22%7.51%-16.00%-14.11%20.83%17.22%-26.87%27.46%
FEM
First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund
20.43%28.36%3.01%10.84%-14.24%7.40%-1.68%20.55%-15.51%41.05%

Correlation

The correlation between ECON and FEM is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2011

0.81

The correlation between ECON and FEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECON vs. FEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ECON
FEM

Technology

30.4%
24.5%

Financial Services

24.5%
7.0%

Communication Services

10.2%
4.6%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
5.7%

Basic Materials

7.1%
8.6%

Industrials

6.5%
20.9%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
2.8%

Energy

3.5%
14.1%

Healthcare

2.8%
3.1%

Utilities

1.4%
6.2%

Real Estate

1.4%
2.5%

Technology

ECON
30.4%
FEM
24.5%

Financial Services

ECON
24.5%
FEM
7.0%

Communication Services

ECON
10.2%
FEM
4.6%

Consumer Cyclical

ECON
8.6%
FEM
5.7%

Basic Materials

ECON
7.1%
FEM
8.6%

Industrials

ECON
6.5%
FEM
20.9%

Consumer Defensive

ECON
3.5%
FEM
2.8%

Energy

ECON
3.5%
FEM
14.1%

Healthcare

ECON
2.8%
FEM
3.1%

Utilities

ECON
1.4%
FEM
6.2%

Real Estate

ECON
1.4%
FEM
2.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ECON vs. FEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECON
ECON Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
ECON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECON Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECON Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
ECON Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECON Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

FEM
FEM Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
FEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
FEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ECON vs. FEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) and First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM). 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.


ECONFEMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.22

2.45

+0.77

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.16

3.11

+1.05

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.43

+0.14

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.76

4.58

+0.19

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

17.83

17.35

+0.48

ECON vs. FEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECON Sharpe Ratio is 3.22, which is higher than the FEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECON and FEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ECONFEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.22

2.45

+0.77

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.40

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.47

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.24

0.19

+0.05

Drawdowns

ECON vs. FEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECON drawdown since its inception was -45.37%, roughly equal to the maximum FEM drawdown of -46.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECON and FEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ECONFEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.37%

-46.23%

+0.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.76%

-9.31%

-4.45%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.37%

-18.79%

+2.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.08%

-31.72%

-6.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.37%

-46.23%

+0.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.24%

-2.46%

+1.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.65%

-15.04%

-1.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.67%

2.45%

+1.22%

Volatility

ECON vs. FEM - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) has a higher volatility of 9.10% compared to First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) at 6.18%. This indicates that ECON's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ECONFEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.10%

6.18%

+2.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.65%

14.47%

+3.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.38%

17.40%

+2.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.28%

18.39%

+1.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.03%

20.96%

+0.07%

ECON vs. FEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECON has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than FEM's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

ECON vs. FEM - Dividend Comparison

ECON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, less than FEM's 2.58% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
1.31%1.77%0.76%1.57%2.06%1.08%0.63%1.68%0.98%0.35%0.74%1.10%
FEM
First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund
2.58%3.13%3.66%4.96%6.15%4.15%2.68%3.31%3.52%2.45%2.25%3.61%

Frequently Asked Questions


ECON and FEM have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ECON has higher volatility (9.10%) compared to FEM (6.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECON dropped -45.37% vs FEM's -46.23%.

On 10-year performance, FEM leads with 9.75% vs 6.10% for ECON. On fees, ECON is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, FEM has been the lower-risk option at 6.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FEM has performed better with a 9.75% return vs 6.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ECON is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FEM.

FEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.58%, compared with 1.31% for ECON.

ECON tracks Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index, while FEM tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX EM Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ECON and 0.80% for FEM.

ECON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.22 vs 2.45), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ECON and FEM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer