EEMO vs. FMTM
EEMO (Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF) and FMTM (MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF) are both Momentum funds. EEMO is passively managed, while FMTM is actively managed. Over the past year, EEMO returned 51.13% vs 63.73% for FMTM. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEMO charges 0.31%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FMTM.
Performance
EEMO vs. FMTM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEMO achieves a 36.85% return, which is significantly higher than FMTM's 31.40% return.
EEMO
- 1D
- -2.42%
- 1M
- 10.83%
- YTD
- 36.85%
- 6M
- 37.37%
- 1Y
- 51.13%
- 3Y*
- 24.00%
- 5Y*
- 6.67%
- 10Y*
- 8.50%
FMTM
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- 4.57%
- YTD
- 31.40%
- 6M
- 33.68%
- 1Y
- 63.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EEMO vs. FMTM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF | 36.85% | 16.08% |
FMTM MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF | 31.40% | 27.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEMO and FMTM is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2025 | 0.56 |
The correlation between EEMO and FMTM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.59 - 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
EEMO vs. FMTM — Risk / Return Rank
EEMO
FMTM
EEMO vs. FMTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) and MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF (FMTM). 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.
| EEMO | FMTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.46 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.48 | 5.28 | -1.80 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.93 | 20.65 | -6.72 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EEMO | FMTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.09 | 2.81 | -0.71 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.13 | 2.36 | -2.24 |
Drawdowns
EEMO vs. FMTM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMO drawdown since its inception was -48.47%, which is greater than FMTM's maximum drawdown of -12.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMO and FMTM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEMO | FMTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.47% | -12.12% | -36.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.75% | -12.12% | -2.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.06% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.03% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.57% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.71% | -0.26% | -3.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -20.17% | -1.88% | -18.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.68% | 3.10% | +0.58% |
Volatility
EEMO vs. FMTM - Volatility Comparison
Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) has a higher volatility of 14.18% compared to MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF (FMTM) at 6.45%. This indicates that EEMO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMTM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEMO | FMTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.18% | 6.45% | +7.73% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.26% | 17.84% | +4.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.58% | 22.83% | +1.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.36% | 22.91% | -3.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.59% | 22.91% | -1.32% |
EEMO vs. FMTM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEMO has a 0.31% expense ratio, which is lower than FMTM's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
EEMO vs. FMTM - Dividend Comparison
EEMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than FMTM's 0.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF | 1.68% | 2.31% | 2.57% | 3.65% | 3.82% | 1.51% | 1.53% | 2.13% | 13.10% | 5.13% | 1.55% | 2.92% |
FMTM MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF | 0.23% | 0.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EEMO and FMTM have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EEMO has higher volatility (14.18%) compared to FMTM (6.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMO dropped -48.47% vs FMTM's -12.12%.
On 1-year performance, FMTM leads with 63.73% vs 51.13% for EEMO. On fees, EEMO is cheaper at 0.31% per year. On volatility, FMTM has been the lower-risk option at 6.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FMTM has performed better with a 63.73% return vs 51.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EEMO is cheaper with a 0.31% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FMTM.
EEMO has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 0.23% for FMTM.
Their fees differ too: 0.31% for EEMO and 0.45% for FMTM.
FMTM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 2.09), 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 EEMO and FMTM
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