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

Performance

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). 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 11.30% return, which is significantly lower than EMEQ's 84.24% return.


EEMS

1D
-0.43%
1M
-4.96%
YTD
11.30%
6M
12.14%
1Y
20.67%
3Y*
15.22%
5Y*
6.27%
10Y*
9.50%

EMEQ

1D
3.40%
1M
10.31%
YTD
84.24%
6M
89.77%
1Y
145.47%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
EEMS
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF
11.30%19.78%-2.53%
EMEQ
Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF
84.24%69.78%-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMS and EMEQ is 0.74, 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

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024

0.74

The correlation between EEMS and EMEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EEMS
EMEQ

Technology

26.4%
1.1%

Industrials

18.2%
0.3%

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
6.2%

Financial Services

9.9%
6.8%

Healthcare

8.7%
1.4%

Basic Materials

8.6%
1.3%

Real Estate

5.8%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
3.8%

Communication Services

2.9%
2.4%

Utilities

2.6%
0.9%

Energy

2.1%
1.3%

Technology

EEMS
26.4%
EMEQ
1.1%

Industrials

EEMS
18.2%
EMEQ
0.3%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMS
9.9%
EMEQ
6.2%

Financial Services

EEMS
9.9%
EMEQ
6.8%

Healthcare

EEMS
8.7%
EMEQ
1.4%

Basic Materials

EEMS
8.6%
EMEQ
1.3%

Real Estate

EEMS
5.8%
EMEQ

-

Consumer Defensive

EEMS
4.9%
EMEQ
3.8%

Communication Services

EEMS
2.9%
EMEQ
2.4%

Utilities

EEMS
2.6%
EMEQ
0.9%

Energy

EEMS
2.1%
EMEQ
1.3%

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. EMEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMS
EEMS Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
EEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

EMEQ
EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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. EMEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


EEMSEMEQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.83

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.60

-0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.91

8.17

-6.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.34

30.04

-23.70

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the EMEQ Sharpe Ratio of 3.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMS and EMEQ, 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...

Drawdowns

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMS drawdown since its inception was -48.89%, which is greater than EMEQ's maximum drawdown of -19.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMS and EMEQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEMSEMEQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.89%

-19.99%

-28.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.87%

-17.91%

+7.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.71%

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

-5.24%

-5.17%

-0.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.48%

-4.04%

-6.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.27%

4.86%

-1.59%

Volatility

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) is 9.25%, while Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a volatility of 21.36%. This indicates that EEMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EEMSEMEQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.25%

21.36%

-12.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.17%

34.65%

-17.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.96%

37.32%

-18.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.50%

32.97%

-16.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.12%

32.97%

-14.85%

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMS has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is lower than EMEQ's 0.86% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEMS vs. EMEQ - Dividend Comparison

EEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%, more than EMEQ's 1.50% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEMS
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF
2.87%3.09%2.60%2.69%0.89%3.56%2.14%2.64%3.06%2.47%2.51%2.33%
EMEQ
Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF
1.50%2.76%0.84%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EEMS and EMEQ have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMEQ has higher volatility (21.36%) compared to EEMS (9.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMS dropped -48.89% vs EMEQ's -19.99%.

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 145.47% vs 20.67% for EEMS. On fees, EEMS is cheaper at 0.73% per year. On volatility, EEMS has been the lower-risk option at 9.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 145.47% return vs 20.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EEMS is cheaper with a 0.73% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

EEMS has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 1.50% for EMEQ.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Nomura. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for EEMS and 0.86% for EMEQ.

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.92 vs 1.09), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EEMS and EMEQ

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