EEMV vs. EMSF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EEMV (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. EEMV is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, EEMV returned 18.06% vs 42.52% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. EEMV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

EEMV vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMV achieves a 12.46% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 30.73% return.

EEMV

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -2.94%
• 6M: 7.78%
• YTD: 12.46%
• 1Y: 18.06%
• 3Y*: 11.41%
• 5Y*: 5.62%
• 10Y*: 5.71%
• ALL TIME*: 5.22%

EMSF

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -8.36%
• 6M: 17.49%
• YTD: 30.73%
• 1Y: 42.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.92%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF	$16.28M	$14.89M	$17.73M
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	$80.02K	$93.23K	$184.42K

EEMV vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF	12.46%	13.45%	7.98%	6.09%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	30.73%	19.20%	-3.09%	0.98%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMV and EMSF is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023	0.82

The correlation between EEMV and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMV vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEMV	EMSF
Technology	37.4%	52.8%
Financial Services	18.3%	15.0%
Communication Services	10.0%	1.7%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	6.3%
Industrials	5.8%	11.0%
Healthcare	5.5%	6.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	3.6%
Utilities	4.2%	2.1%
Energy	3.5%	-
Basic Materials	2.6%	-
Real Estate	0.6%	1.6%

Return for Risk

EEMV vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EEMV

EEMV Risk / Return Rank: 48
EEMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
EEMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
EEMV Omega Ratio Rank: 49
EEMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EEMV Martin Ratio Rank: 49

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 57
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 59

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EEMV vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) 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.

	EEMV	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.10	1.36	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	1.86	-0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.25	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.90	2.10	-0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.72	7.05	-1.34

EEMV vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.10, which is comparable to the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMV and EMSF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EEMV vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMV drawdown since its inception was -31.56%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMV and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEMV	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.56%	-24.75%	-6.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.50%	-19.49%	+9.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.47%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.90%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-31.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.20%	-15.62%	+8.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.94%	-5.91%	-2.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.16%	5.80%	-2.64%

Volatility

EEMV vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) is 6.49%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 10.79%. This indicates that EEMV 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.

Volatility by Period

	EEMV	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.49%	10.79%	-4.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.49%	26.54%	-11.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.51%	30.10%	-13.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.61%	24.40%	-11.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.06%	24.40%	-10.34%

EEMV vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEMV vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

EEMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, more than EMSF's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEMV iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF	2.27%	2.65%	3.50%	2.75%	1.93%	2.14%	2.45%	2.63%	2.46%	2.34%	2.79%	2.55%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.44%	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

Can I hold both EEMV and EMSF in my portfolio?

EEMV and EMSF have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EEMV or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to EEMV (6.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMV dropped -31.56% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, EEMV or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 42.52% vs 18.06% for EEMV. On fees, EEMV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EEMV has been the lower-risk option at 6.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEMV or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 42.52% return vs 18.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEMV or EMSF?

EEMV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EEMV or EMSF?

EEMV has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 1.44% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between EEMV and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EEMV and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 1.10), 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.