EEM vs. DFIV

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

EEM (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) and DFIV (Dimensional International Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net), while DFIV is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Dimensional. EEM is passively managed, while DFIV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, EEM returned 22.37%/yr vs 22.80%/yr for DFIV. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEM charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for DFIV.

Performance

EEM vs. DFIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEM achieves a 28.15% return, which is significantly higher than DFIV's 12.22% return.

EEM

• 1D: 3.29%
• 1M: 7.75%
• YTD: 28.15%
• 6M: 31.50%
• 1Y: 52.42%
• 3Y*: 22.37%
• 5Y*: 7.63%
• 10Y*: 10.16%

DFIV

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 1.90%
• YTD: 12.22%
• 6M: 13.16%
• 1Y: 34.41%
• 3Y*: 22.80%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EEM vs. DFIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	28.15%	33.98%	6.49%	8.95%	-20.56%	-5.55%
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	12.22%	45.36%	7.26%	17.75%	-3.70%	0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between EEM and DFIV is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021	0.72

The correlation between EEM and DFIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEM vs. DFIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEM	DFIV
Technology	44.3%	3.2%
Financial Services	17.7%	32.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	10.0%
Industrials	6.6%	9.8%
Communication Services	6.0%	4.3%
Basic Materials	5.9%	11.4%
Energy	3.4%	15.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	4.9%
Healthcare	2.5%	4.9%
Utilities	1.8%	2.2%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.7%

Return for Risk

EEM vs. DFIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEM

EEM Risk / Return Rank: 82
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

DFIV

DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 81
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

EEM vs. DFIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). 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.

	EEM	DFIV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.42	2.46	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.09	3.35	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.44	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.90	3.58	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.36	13.72	+0.63

EEM vs. DFIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the DFIV Sharpe Ratio of 2.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEM and DFIV, 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

EEM vs. DFIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEM drawdown since its inception was -66.43%, which is greater than DFIV's maximum drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEM and DFIV.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEM	DFIV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.43%	-25.42%	-41.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.52%	-9.66%	-3.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.29%	-14.72%	-2.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.49%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.82%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-0.41%	-0.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.00%	-4.46%	-11.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.66%	2.51%	+1.15%

Volatility

EEM vs. DFIV - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) has a higher volatility of 11.26% compared to Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) at 4.50%. This indicates that EEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EEM	DFIV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.26%	4.50%	+6.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.62%	11.43%	+8.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.84%	14.09%	+7.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.32%	16.65%	+2.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.67%	16.65%	+4.02%

EEM vs. DFIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEM has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than DFIV's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEM vs. DFIV - Dividend Comparison

EEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, less than DFIV's 2.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFIV Dimensional International Value ETF	2.54%	2.92%	3.88%	3.93%	3.84%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	2.24%	2.22%	2.43%	2.63%	2.50%	1.99%	1.45%	2.76%	2.24%	1.89%	1.89%	2.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EEM and DFIV in my portfolio?

EEM and DFIV have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EEM or DFIV?

EEM has higher volatility (11.26%) compared to DFIV (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEM dropped -66.43% vs DFIV's -25.42%.

Which ETF is better, EEM or DFIV?

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 22.80% vs 22.37% for EEM. On fees, DFIV is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, DFIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEM or DFIV?

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 22.80% return vs 22.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEM or DFIV?

DFIV is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EEM or DFIV?

DFIV has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 2.24% for EEM.

What is the main difference between EEM and DFIV?

EEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while DFIV is Foreign Large Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for EEM and 0.27% for DFIV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 2.42), 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.