EGPT vs. SMH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EGPT (VanEck Vectors Egypt Index ETF) and SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EGPT is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MVIS Egypt Index, while SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EGPT charges 0.98%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.

Performance

EGPT vs. SMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Egypt Index ETF (EGPT) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

EGPT

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SMH

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: 25.87%
• YTD: 77.13%
• 6M: 75.61%
• 1Y: 157.20%
• 3Y*: 64.17%
• 5Y*: 39.21%
• 10Y*: 37.68%

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

EGPT vs. SMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EGPT VanEck Vectors Egypt Index ETF	0.00%	0.00%	-11.22%	27.27%	-24.66%	11.31%	-11.53%	6.80%	-13.88%	24.83%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	77.13%	49.17%	39.10%	73.38%	-33.53%	42.13%	55.53%	64.45%	-9.05%	38.48%

Correlation

The correlation between EGPT and SMH is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.04
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.19
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2010	0.23

The correlation between EGPT and SMH shifts across timeframes, from 0.04 (3 years) to 0.23 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EGPT vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EGPT	SMH
Real Estate	30.5%	-
Basic Materials	23.4%	-
Financial Services	10.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	10.0%	-
Technology	8.0%	100.0%
Industrials	6.9%	-
Communication Services	4.2%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.5%	-
Healthcare	2.0%	-
Energy	1.1%	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

EGPT vs. SMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMH

SMH Risk / Return Rank: 96
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 95
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

EGPT vs. SMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Egypt Index ETF (EGPT) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EGPT	SMH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	5.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.13	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	0.34	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	EGPT	SMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-84.96%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-14.93%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.74%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-45.30%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	0.00%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-41.09%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.89%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	EGPT	SMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	11.47%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	24.29%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	30.56%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	35.01%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	32.57%	—

EGPT vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

EGPT has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EGPT vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison

EGPT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SMH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EGPT VanEck Vectors Egypt Index ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.15%	6.02%	1.32%	2.45%	2.50%	2.09%	1.72%	0.77%	1.60%	1.59%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	0.17%	0.31%	0.44%	0.60%	1.18%	0.51%	0.69%	1.50%	1.88%	1.43%	0.80%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EGPT and SMH in my portfolio?

EGPT and SMH have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EGPT or SMH?

On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EGPT or SMH?

SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for EGPT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EGPT or SMH?

SMH has the higher dividend yield at 0.17%, compared with 0.00% for EGPT.

What is the main difference between EGPT and SMH?

EGPT is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while SMH is Semiconductors. EGPT tracks MVIS Egypt Index, while SMH tracks MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for EGPT and 0.35% for SMH.