PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EEMV vs. FDLO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EEMV vs. FDLO

Last updated Jul 21, 2026
Documentation

EEMV (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF) and FDLO (Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMV is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while FDLO is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the Fidelity U.S. Low Volatility Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EEMV returned 5.12%/yr vs 9.21%/yr for FDLO. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEMV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FDLO.

Performance

EEMV vs. FDLO - 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 Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF (FDLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMV achieves a 11.64% return, which is significantly higher than FDLO's 5.53% return.

EEMV

1D
-0.08%
1M
-7.54%
6M
8.10%
YTD
11.64%
1Y
15.38%
3Y*
11.47%
5Y*
5.12%
10Y*
5.61%
ALL TIME*
5.18%

FDLO

1D
-0.26%
1M
2.39%
6M
3.93%
YTD
5.53%
1Y
12.36%
3Y*
12.82%
5Y*
9.21%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
12.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEMV vs. FDLO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEMV
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF		11.64%13.45%7.98%7.75%-13.94%5.05%6.90%7.83%-5.81%27.28%
FDLO
Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF		5.53%11.77%16.06%16.38%-10.38%24.00%12.19%31.10%-0.26%20.44%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMV and FDLO is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

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

0.47

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2016

0.56

The correlation between EEMV and FDLO shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EEMV vs. FDLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EEMV
FDLO

Technology

37.4%
33.2%

Financial Services

18.3%
13.1%

Communication Services

10.0%
10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

6.7%
10.0%

Industrials

5.8%
8.7%

Healthcare

5.5%
10.6%

Consumer Defensive

5.4%
4.7%

Utilities

4.2%
2.4%

Energy

3.5%
3.1%

Basic Materials

2.6%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.6%
2.3%

Technology

EEMV
37.4%
FDLO
33.2%

Financial Services

EEMV
18.3%
FDLO
13.1%

Communication Services

EEMV
10.0%
FDLO
10.1%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMV
6.7%
FDLO
10.0%

Industrials

EEMV
5.8%
FDLO
8.7%

Healthcare

EEMV
5.5%
FDLO
10.6%

Consumer Defensive

EEMV
5.4%
FDLO
4.7%

Utilities

EEMV
4.2%
FDLO
2.4%

Energy

EEMV
3.5%
FDLO
3.1%

Basic Materials

EEMV
2.6%
FDLO
1.8%

Real Estate

EEMV
0.6%
FDLO
2.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF

Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF

Often compared with EEMV:
EEMV vs. EEMEEMV vs. IEMGEEMV vs. SPYEEMV vs. EFAVEEMV vs. MCHIEEMV vs. USMVEEMV vs. SPEM
Often compared with FDLO:
FDLO vs. FDVVFDLO vs. FULVXFDLO vs. VOOFDLO vs. FDRRFDLO vs. SCHDFDLO vs. FMILFDLO vs. FTLS

Return for Risk

EEMV vs. FDLO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EEMV
EEMV Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
EEMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMV Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMV Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
FDLO
FDLO Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
FDLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDLO Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
FDLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDLO Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

EEMV vs. FDLO - 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 Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF (FDLO). 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.

EEMVFDLODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.97
1.39

-0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.39
1.97

-0.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.25

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.67

1.74

-0.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.34

7.06

-1.72

EEMV vs. FDLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMV Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the FDLO Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMV and FDLO, 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

EEMV vs. FDLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMV drawdown since its inception was -31.56%, smaller than the maximum FDLO drawdown of -34.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMV and FDLO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EEMVFDLODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.56%

-34.35%

+2.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.22%

-7.13%

-2.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.47%

-13.68%

+1.21%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.90%

-19.23%

-2.67%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.56%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.88%

-0.80%

-7.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.94%

-3.35%

-4.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.89%

1.76%

+1.13%

Volatility

EEMV vs. FDLO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) has a higher volatility of 6.62% compared to Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF (FDLO) at 2.91%. This indicates that EEMV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EEMVFDLODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.62%

2.91%

+3.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.93%

6.98%

+7.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.97%

8.97%

+7.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.51%

13.09%

-0.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.00%

15.45%

-1.45%

EEMV vs. FDLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than FDLO's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

EEMV vs. FDLO - Dividend Comparison

EEMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%, more than FDLO's 1.41% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEMV
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF		2.29%2.65%3.50%2.75%1.93%2.14%2.45%2.63%2.46%2.34%2.79%2.55%
FDLO
Fidelity Low Volatility Factor ETF		1.41%1.37%1.40%1.35%1.49%1.11%1.38%1.55%1.76%1.61%0.55%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

EEMV and FDLO have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EEMV has higher volatility (6.62%) compared to FDLO (2.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMV dropped -31.56% vs FDLO's -34.35%.

On 5-year performance, FDLO leads with 9.21% vs 5.12% for EEMV. On fees, FDLO is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FDLO has been the lower-risk option at 2.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FDLO has performed better with a 9.21% return vs 5.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDLO is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EEMV.

EEMV has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 1.41% for FDLO.

EEMV is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while FDLO is Volatility Hedged Equity. EEMV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while FDLO tracks Fidelity U.S. Low Volatility Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EEMV and 0.15% for FDLO.

FDLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs 0.97), 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 EEMV and FDLO

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