EEM vs. EMGF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EEM (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) and EMGF (iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, while EMGF is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEM returned 9.93%/yr vs 11.48%/yr for EMGF. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EEM charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EMGF.

Performance

EEM vs. EMGF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEM achieves a 27.80% return, which is significantly lower than EMGF's 30.01% return. Over the past 10 years, EEM has underperformed EMGF with an annualized return of 9.93%, while EMGF has yielded a comparatively higher 11.48% annualized return.

EEM

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: 9.08%
• YTD: 27.80%
• 6M: 30.51%
• 1Y: 55.80%
• 3Y*: 23.95%
• 5Y*: 7.01%
• 10Y*: 9.93%

EMGF

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: 9.65%
• YTD: 30.01%
• 6M: 32.52%
• 1Y: 55.31%
• 3Y*: 26.88%
• 5Y*: 10.38%
• 10Y*: 11.48%

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

EEM vs. EMGF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	27.80%	33.98%	6.49%	8.95%	-20.56%	-3.63%	17.02%	18.22%	-15.31%	37.26%
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF	30.01%	31.41%	9.06%	10.86%	-16.55%	6.65%	10.27%	20.96%	-19.71%	42.37%

Correlation

The correlation between EEM and EMGF is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2015	0.91

The correlation between EEM and EMGF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEM vs. EMGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEM	EMGF
Technology	43.6%	34.7%
Financial Services	17.5%	19.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.1%	10.4%
Industrials	6.2%	7.8%
Basic Materials	6.1%	5.8%
Communication Services	5.7%	7.4%
Energy	3.3%	4.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	3.8%
Healthcare	2.5%	2.9%
Utilities	2.0%	2.5%
Real Estate	0.9%	1.1%

Return for Risk

EEM vs. EMGF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEM

EEM Risk / Return Rank: 81
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 80

EMGF

EMGF Risk / Return Rank: 81
EMGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EMGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
EMGF Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EMGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
EMGF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. EMGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF). 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.

	EEM	EMGF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	2.78	+0.03
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.62	3.62	0.00
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.51	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.15	4.11	+0.04
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.99	15.84	+0.14
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EEM vs. EMGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is comparable to the EMGF Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEM and EMGF, 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

	EEM	EMGF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81	2.78	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	0.59	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.59	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.57	-0.19

Drawdowns

EEM vs. EMGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEM drawdown since its inception was -66.43%, which is greater than EMGF's maximum drawdown of -40.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEM and EMGF.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEM	EMGF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.43%	-40.23%	-26.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.52%	-13.54%	+0.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.29%	-17.65%	+0.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.71%	-28.60%	-9.11%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.82%	-40.23%	+0.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.24%	-1.20%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.02%	-10.05%	-5.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.50%	3.50%	0.00%

Volatility

EEM vs. EMGF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) is 8.52%, while iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that EEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EEM	EMGF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.52%	9.20%	-0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.42%	17.50%	-0.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.97%	19.99%	-0.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.91%	17.69%	+1.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.50%	19.48%	+1.02%

EEM vs. EMGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEM has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than EMGF's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEM vs. EMGF - Dividend Comparison

EEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, less than EMGF's 1.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	1.74%	2.22%	2.43%	2.63%	2.50%	1.99%	1.45%	2.76%	2.24%	1.89%	1.89%	2.49%
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF	1.94%	2.52%	3.42%	5.94%	4.04%	2.48%	1.95%	2.63%	2.73%	1.94%	2.04%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EEM and EMGF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, EEM and EMGF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EEM or EMGF?

EMGF has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to EEM (8.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEM dropped -66.43% vs EMGF's -40.23%.

Which ETF is better, EEM or EMGF?

On 10-year performance, EMGF leads with 11.48% vs 9.93% for EEM. On fees, EMGF is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, EEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEM or EMGF?

Over the 10-year period, EMGF has performed better with a 11.48% return vs 9.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEM or EMGF?

EMGF is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

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

EMGF has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 1.74% for EEM.

What is the main difference between EEM and EMGF?

EEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while EMGF is Emerging Markets Equities. EEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index, while EMGF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for EEM and 0.45% for EMGF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 2.78), 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.