EFV vs. KEMX
EFV (iShares MSCI EAFE Value ETF) and KEMX (KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - EFV tracks the MSCI EAFE Value Index while KEMX tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EFV returned 12.07%/yr vs 13.52%/yr for KEMX. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EFV charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for KEMX.
Performance
EFV vs. KEMX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EFV achieves a 9.13% return, which is significantly lower than KEMX's 42.26% return.
EFV
- 1D
- -0.78%
- 1M
- 2.26%
- YTD
- 9.13%
- 6M
- 12.94%
- 1Y
- 27.83%
- 3Y*
- 21.99%
- 5Y*
- 12.07%
- 10Y*
- 9.75%
KEMX
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- 13.02%
- YTD
- 42.26%
- 6M
- 47.92%
- 1Y
- 79.97%
- 3Y*
- 29.66%
- 5Y*
- 13.52%
- 10Y*
- —
EFV vs. KEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFV iShares MSCI EAFE Value ETF | 9.13% | 42.22% | 5.35% | 18.85% | -5.22% | 11.08% | -2.97% | 4.06% |
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF | 42.26% | 38.28% | 0.36% | 20.57% | -19.35% | 10.55% | 12.84% | 7.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between EFV and KEMX is 0.65, 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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2019 | 0.73 |
The correlation between EFV and KEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
EFV vs. KEMX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EFV
KEMX
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Energy
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Real Estate
Financial Services
EFV
KEMX
Industrials
EFV
KEMX
Consumer Defensive
EFV
KEMX
Basic Materials
EFV
KEMX
Healthcare
EFV
KEMX
Energy
EFV
KEMX
Utilities
EFV
KEMX
Consumer Cyclical
EFV
KEMX
Communication Services
EFV
KEMX
Technology
EFV
KEMX
Real Estate
EFV
KEMX
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
EFV vs. KEMX — Risk / Return Rank
EFV
KEMX
EFV vs. KEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EAFE Value ETF (EFV) 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.
| EFV | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.58 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.62 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.57 | 5.24 | -2.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.57 | 20.86 | -11.29 |
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
| EFV | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.97 | 3.59 | -1.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 | 0.75 | +0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | 0.68 | -0.42 |
Drawdowns
EFV vs. KEMX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EFV drawdown since its inception was -63.94%, which is greater than KEMX's maximum drawdown of -38.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFV and KEMX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EFV | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.94% | -38.80% | -25.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.90% | -15.36% | +4.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.72% | -19.62% | +5.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.84% | -30.85% | +5.01% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -43.16% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.51% | -1.31% | -1.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.83% | -8.86% | -5.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.91% | 3.85% | -0.94% |
Volatility
EFV vs. KEMX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI EAFE Value ETF (EFV) is 4.52%, while KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) has a volatility of 9.86%. This indicates that EFV 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
| EFV | KEMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.52% | 9.86% | -5.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.56% | 19.90% | -8.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.21% | 22.40% | -8.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.96% | 18.21% | -2.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.86% | 20.94% | -3.08% |
EFV vs. KEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
EFV has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than KEMX's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
EFV vs. KEMX - Dividend Comparison
EFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.81%, more than KEMX's 2.31% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFV iShares MSCI EAFE Value ETF | 3.81% | 4.16% | 4.66% | 4.36% | 4.17% | 4.07% | 2.42% | 4.62% | 4.56% | 3.56% | 3.28% | 3.59% |
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF | 2.31% | 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
EFV and KEMX have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KEMX has higher volatility (9.86%) compared to EFV (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFV dropped -63.94% vs KEMX's -38.80%.
On 5-year performance, KEMX leads with 13.52% vs 12.07% for EFV. On fees, KEMX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EFV has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. 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 13.52% return vs 12.07%. 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 0.39% for EFV.
EFV has the higher dividend yield at 3.81%, compared with 2.31% for KEMX.
EFV tracks MSCI EAFE Value Index, while KEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EFV and 0.25% for KEMX.
KEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs 1.97), 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.
Find the right allocation for EFV 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