PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEMS vs. BBEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEMS vs. BBEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) and JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMS achieves a 15.19% return, which is significantly lower than BBEM's 25.45% return.


EEMS

1D
0.49%
1M
-0.06%
YTD
15.19%
6M
17.20%
1Y
28.89%
3Y*
17.04%
5Y*
7.03%
10Y*
9.25%

BBEM

1D
-1.24%
1M
5.92%
YTD
25.45%
6M
27.96%
1Y
49.80%
3Y*
22.47%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEMS vs. BBEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EEMS
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF
15.19%19.78%3.13%17.11%
BBEM
JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF
25.45%32.43%5.61%6.01%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMS and BBEM is 0.86, 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

0.86

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023

0.85

The correlation between EEMS and BBEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMS vs. BBEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EEMS
BBEM

Technology

22.7%
36.5%

Industrials

18.9%
8.1%

Financial Services

11.1%
19.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
10.0%

Healthcare

9.4%
2.8%

Basic Materials

9.3%
6.2%

Real Estate

5.9%
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

5.2%
3.0%

Communication Services

2.9%
6.7%

Utilities

2.7%
2.5%

Energy

2.4%
4.2%

Technology

EEMS
22.7%
BBEM
36.5%

Industrials

EEMS
18.9%
BBEM
8.1%

Financial Services

EEMS
11.1%
BBEM
19.0%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMS
9.6%
BBEM
10.0%

Healthcare

EEMS
9.4%
BBEM
2.8%

Basic Materials

EEMS
9.3%
BBEM
6.2%

Real Estate

EEMS
5.9%
BBEM
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

EEMS
5.2%
BBEM
3.0%

Communication Services

EEMS
2.9%
BBEM
6.7%

Utilities

EEMS
2.7%
BBEM
2.5%

Energy

EEMS
2.4%
BBEM
4.2%

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

EEMS vs. BBEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMS
EEMS Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
EEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

BBEM
BBEM Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
BBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
BBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

EEMS vs. BBEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) and JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM). 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.


EEMSBBEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.47

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.67

3.81

-1.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.39

15.02

-5.64

EEMS vs. BBEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is lower than the BBEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMS and BBEM, 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


EEMSBBEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.68

2.56

-0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.32

1.29

-0.97

Drawdowns

EEMS vs. BBEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMS drawdown since its inception was -48.89%, which is greater than BBEM's maximum drawdown of -17.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMS and BBEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEMSBBEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.89%

-17.42%

-31.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.87%

-13.12%

+2.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.71%

-17.42%

-2.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.93%

-2.53%

+0.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.50%

-3.70%

-6.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.08%

3.32%

-0.24%

Volatility

EEMS vs. BBEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) is 6.80%, while JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM) has a volatility of 8.57%. This indicates that EEMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BBEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EEMSBBEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.80%

8.57%

-1.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.90%

17.26%

-2.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.30%

19.54%

-2.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.06%

17.50%

-1.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.99%

17.50%

+0.49%

EEMS vs. BBEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMS has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than BBEM's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEMS vs. BBEM - Dividend Comparison

EEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, less than BBEM's 4.65% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BBEM
JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF
4.65%5.86%2.73%1.94%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
EEMS
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF
2.68%3.09%2.60%2.69%0.89%3.56%2.14%2.64%3.06%2.47%2.51%2.33%

Frequently Asked Questions


EEMS and BBEM have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BBEM has higher volatility (8.57%) compared to EEMS (6.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMS dropped -48.89% vs BBEM's -17.42%.

On 3-year performance, BBEM leads with 22.47% vs 17.04% for EEMS. On fees, BBEM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EEMS has been the lower-risk option at 6.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, BBEM has performed better with a 22.47% return vs 17.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BBEM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.73% for EEMS.

BBEM has the higher dividend yield at 4.65%, compared with 2.68% for EEMS.

EEMS tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap Index, while BBEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Target Market Exposure Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: iShares and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for EEMS and 0.15% for BBEM.

BBEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 1.68), 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 EEMS and BBEM

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