PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EFG vs. KEMX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EFG vs. KEMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFG achieves a 8.93% return, which is significantly lower than KEMX's 40.51% return.


EFG

1D
0.94%
1M
3.79%
YTD
8.93%
6M
9.83%
1Y
14.70%
3Y*
11.46%
5Y*
4.43%
10Y*
8.02%

KEMX

1D
-1.23%
1M
8.82%
YTD
40.51%
6M
46.50%
1Y
75.91%
3Y*
29.24%
5Y*
13.24%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EFG vs. KEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EFG
iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF
8.93%20.70%1.53%17.55%-23.12%11.01%17.85%11.48%
KEMX
KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
40.51%38.28%0.36%20.57%-19.35%10.55%12.84%7.93%

Correlation

The correlation between EFG and KEMX is 0.77, 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

0.77

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

0.75

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

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2019

0.75

The correlation between EFG and KEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

EFG vs. KEMX - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EFG
KEMX

Industrials

29.6%
8.6%

Technology

18.1%
41.2%

Healthcare

14.2%
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
5.4%

Financial Services

10.6%
20.7%

Consumer Defensive

5.1%
3.0%

Communication Services

4.8%
3.2%

Basic Materials

4.6%
8.2%

Utilities

1.1%
2.0%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.2%

Energy

0.2%
4.8%

Industrials

EFG
29.6%
KEMX
8.6%

Technology

EFG
18.1%
KEMX
41.2%

Healthcare

EFG
14.2%
KEMX
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

EFG
10.7%
KEMX
5.4%

Financial Services

EFG
10.6%
KEMX
20.7%

Consumer Defensive

EFG
5.1%
KEMX
3.0%

Communication Services

EFG
4.8%
KEMX
3.2%

Basic Materials

EFG
4.6%
KEMX
8.2%

Utilities

EFG
1.1%
KEMX
2.0%

Real Estate

EFG
1.0%
KEMX
1.2%

Energy

EFG
0.2%
KEMX
4.8%

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

EFG vs. KEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

EFG
EFG Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
EFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFG Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
EFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2525
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFG Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

KEMX
KEMX Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
KEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
KEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
KEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
KEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

EFG vs. KEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). 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.


EFGKEMXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

1.59

-0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.15

4.97

-3.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.26

19.78

-15.52

EFG vs. KEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is lower than the KEMX Sharpe Ratio of 3.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFG and KEMX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EFGKEMXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

3.40

-2.54

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.25

0.73

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

0.67

-0.38

Drawdowns

EFG vs. KEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFG drawdown since its inception was -58.40%, which is greater than KEMX's maximum drawdown of -38.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFG and KEMX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EFGKEMXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.40%

-38.80%

-19.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.78%

-15.36%

+2.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.87%

-19.62%

+2.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.78%

-30.85%

-4.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.52%

+2.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.15%

-8.85%

-3.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.46%

3.85%

-0.39%

Volatility

EFG vs. KEMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF (EFG) is 5.72%, while KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) has a volatility of 9.80%. This indicates that EFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EFGKEMXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.72%

9.80%

-4.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.38%

19.96%

-5.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.08%

22.44%

-5.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.11%

18.21%

-0.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.69%

20.94%

-3.25%

EFG vs. KEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFG has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than KEMX's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

EFG vs. KEMX - Dividend Comparison

EFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.32%, which matches KEMX's 2.33% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EFG
iShares MSCI EAFE Growth ETF
2.32%2.53%1.64%1.63%1.27%1.54%0.85%1.69%1.98%1.56%2.20%1.75%
KEMX
KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
2.33%3.28%3.39%2.00%4.10%4.79%1.69%2.77%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EFG and KEMX have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KEMX has higher volatility (9.80%) compared to EFG (5.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFG dropped -58.40% vs KEMX's -38.80%.

On 5-year performance, KEMX leads with 13.24% vs 4.43% for EFG. On fees, KEMX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EFG has been the lower-risk option at 5.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, KEMX has performed better with a 13.24% return vs 4.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

KEMX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EFG.

KEMX has the higher dividend yield at 2.33%, compared with 2.32% for EFG.

EFG tracks MSCI EAFE Growth Index, while KEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for EFG and 0.25% for KEMX.

KEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.40 vs 0.86), 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 EFG and KEMX

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