EEMS vs. EMKT
EEMS (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF) and EMKT (Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. EEMS is passively managed, while EMKT is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EEMS charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for EMKT.
Performance
EEMS vs. EMKT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEMS achieves a 14.63% return, which is significantly lower than EMKT's 30.02% return.
EEMS
- 1D
- -1.36%
- 1M
- 1.46%
- YTD
- 14.63%
- 6M
- 16.52%
- 1Y
- 29.38%
- 3Y*
- 16.81%
- 5Y*
- 6.92%
- 10Y*
- 9.29%
EMKT
- 1D
- -1.45%
- 1M
- 11.71%
- YTD
- 30.02%
- 6M
- 31.86%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EEMS vs. EMKT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EEMS iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF | 14.63% | 0.05% |
EMKT Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF | 30.02% | -1.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEMS and EMKT is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2025 | 0.81 |
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. EMKT — Risk / Return Rank
EEMS
EMKT
EEMS vs. EMKT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) and Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMKT). 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.
| EEMS | EMKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.72 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.56 | — | — |
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
| EEMS | EMKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.71 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 | — | — |
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 | 2.33 | -2.01 |
Drawdowns
EEMS vs. EMKT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMS drawdown since its inception was -48.89%, which is greater than EMKT's maximum drawdown of -14.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMS and EMKT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEMS | EMKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.89% | -14.21% | -34.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.87% | — | — |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.41% | -1.45% | -0.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.50% | -3.04% | -7.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.08% | — | — |
Volatility
EEMS vs. EMKT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEMS | EMKT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.07% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.90% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.30% | 22.46% | -5.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.06% | 22.46% | -6.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.99% | 22.46% | -4.47% |
EEMS vs. EMKT - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEMS has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is lower than EMKT's 0.74% expense ratio.
Dividends
EEMS vs. EMKT - Dividend Comparison
EEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, while EMKT has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMS iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF | 2.69% | 3.09% | 2.60% | 2.69% | 0.89% | 3.56% | 2.14% | 2.64% | 3.06% | 2.47% | 2.51% | 2.33% |
EMKT Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EEMS and EMKT have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EEMS is cheaper at 0.73% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EEMS is cheaper with a 0.73% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for EMKT.
EEMS has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 0.00% for EMKT.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Lazard. Their fees differ too: 0.73% for EEMS and 0.74% for EMKT.
Find the right allocation for EEMS and EMKT
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