EEMX vs. MKOR

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EEMX (SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF) and MKOR (Matthews Korea Active ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds. EEMX is passively managed, while MKOR is actively managed. Over the past year, EEMX returned 54.54% vs 173.39% for MKOR. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEMX charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MKOR.

Performance

EEMX vs. MKOR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF (EEMX) and Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMX achieves a 27.49% return, which is significantly lower than MKOR's 93.84% return.

EEMX

• 1D: -1.13%
• 1M: 6.59%
• YTD: 27.49%
• 6M: 30.63%
• 1Y: 54.54%
• 3Y*: 24.62%
• 5Y*: 7.82%
• 10Y*: —

MKOR

• 1D: -1.53%
• 1M: 10.38%
• YTD: 93.84%
• 6M: 106.44%
• 1Y: 173.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EEMX vs. MKOR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EEMX SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF	27.49%	35.23%	7.22%	0.16%
MKOR Matthews Korea Active ETF	93.84%	70.33%	-15.76%	-2.16%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMX and MKOR is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2023	0.74

The correlation between EEMX and MKOR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

EEMX vs. MKOR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEMX	MKOR
Technology	38.7%	56.1%
Financial Services	20.7%	8.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	7.0%
Industrials	7.6%	15.0%
Communication Services	7.3%	2.1%
Basic Materials	6.3%	0.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	1.7%
Healthcare	3.0%	1.5%
Utilities	1.5%	0.6%
Real Estate	1.1%	-
Energy	0.5%	0.6%

Return for Risk

EEMX vs. MKOR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMX

EEMX Risk / Return Rank: 80
EEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
EEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
EEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 81
EEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 80

MKOR

MKOR Risk / Return Rank: 95
MKOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
MKOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
MKOR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
MKOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
MKOR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

EEMX vs. MKOR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF (EEMX) and Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR). 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.

	EEMX	MKOR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	4.71	-2.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.43	4.71	-1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.66	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.95	8.46	-4.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.59	32.58	-16.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EEMX vs. MKOR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMX Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is lower than the MKOR Sharpe Ratio of 4.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMX and MKOR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EEMX	MKOR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	4.71	-2.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.47	1.54	-1.07

Drawdowns

EEMX vs. MKOR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMX drawdown since its inception was -39.90%, which is greater than MKOR's maximum drawdown of -22.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMX and MKOR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEMX	MKOR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.90%	-22.09%	-17.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.89%	-20.62%	+6.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.64%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.08%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.43%	-3.77%	+1.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.73%	-6.22%	-8.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	5.34%	-1.83%

Volatility

EEMX vs. MKOR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF (EEMX) is 8.86%, while Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR) has a volatility of 17.64%. This indicates that EEMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MKOR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EEMX	MKOR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.86%	17.64%	-8.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.24%	33.35%	-15.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.78%	37.21%	-16.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.15%	27.05%	-7.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.22%	27.05%	-6.83%

EEMX vs. MKOR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMX has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than MKOR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEMX vs. MKOR - Dividend Comparison

EEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, more than MKOR's 1.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
EEMX SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF	1.77%	2.28%	2.26%	2.20%	2.38%	1.72%	1.42%	2.57%	2.41%	2.45%	0.15%
MKOR Matthews Korea Active ETF	1.35%	2.62%	5.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EEMX and MKOR in my portfolio?

EEMX and MKOR have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EEMX or MKOR?

MKOR has higher volatility (17.64%) compared to EEMX (8.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMX dropped -39.90% vs MKOR's -22.09%.

Which ETF is better, EEMX or MKOR?

On 1-year performance, MKOR leads with 173.39% vs 54.54% for EEMX. On fees, EEMX is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, EEMX has been the lower-risk option at 8.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEMX or MKOR?

Over the 1-year period, MKOR has performed better with a 173.39% return vs 54.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEMX or MKOR?

EEMX is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MKOR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EEMX or MKOR?

EEMX has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 1.35% for MKOR.

What is the main difference between EEMX and MKOR?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EEMX and 0.79% for MKOR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MKOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.71 vs 2.64), 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.