EEM vs. EMSF
EEM (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. EEM is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, EEM returned 46.62% vs 58.48% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EEM charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.
Performance
EEM vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEM achieves a 23.41% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 45.49% return.
EEM
- 1D
- -5.67%
- 1M
- 2.49%
- YTD
- 23.41%
- 6M
- 24.32%
- 1Y
- 46.62%
- 3Y*
- 22.58%
- 5Y*
- 6.54%
- 10Y*
- 9.87%
EMSF
- 1D
- -6.10%
- 1M
- 5.39%
- YTD
- 45.49%
- 6M
- 45.93%
- 1Y
- 58.48%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EEM vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 23.41% | 33.98% | 6.49% | 7.76% |
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF | 45.49% | 19.20% | -3.09% | 0.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEM and EMSF is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023 | 0.91 |
The correlation between EEM and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
EEM vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank
EEM
EMSF
EEM vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) 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.
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 | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.03 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.37 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.46 | 4.03 | -0.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.70 | 13.14 | -0.45 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EEM vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEM drawdown since its inception was -66.43%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEM and EMSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEM | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.43% | -24.75% | -41.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.52% | -14.57% | +1.05% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.29% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.49% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.82% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.67% | -6.10% | +0.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.99% | -5.72% | -10.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.68% | 4.46% | -0.78% |
Volatility
EEM vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) is 12.59%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 14.20%. This indicates that EEM 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEM | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.59% | 14.20% | -1.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.73% | 24.49% | -3.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.77% | 28.21% | -5.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.55% | 23.87% | -4.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.67% | 23.87% | -3.20% |
EEM vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEM has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
EEM vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison
EEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, more than EMSF's 1.29% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 1.66% | 2.22% | 2.43% | 2.63% | 2.50% | 1.99% | 1.45% | 2.76% | 2.24% | 1.89% | 1.89% | 2.49% |
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF | 1.29% | 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
With a correlation of 0.94, EEM and EMSF 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.
EMSF has higher volatility (14.20%) compared to EEM (12.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEM dropped -66.43% vs EMSF's -24.75%.
On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 58.48% vs 46.62% for EEM. On fees, EEM is cheaper at 0.72% per year. On volatility, EEM has been the lower-risk option at 12.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 58.48% return vs 46.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EEM is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.
EEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.66%, compared with 1.29% for EMSF.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for EEM and 0.79% for EMSF.
EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 2.06), 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.
Find the right allocation for EEM and EMSF
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