EMC vs. BBEM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMC (Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF) and BBEM (JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. EMC is actively managed, while BBEM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMC returned 15.69%/yr vs 21.42%/yr for BBEM. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for BBEM.

Performance

EMC vs. BBEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) and JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMC achieves a 20.87% return, which is significantly lower than BBEM's 21.92% return.

EMC

• 1D: -5.16%
• 1M: 2.68%
• YTD: 20.87%
• 6M: 22.02%
• 1Y: 31.90%
• 3Y*: 15.69%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BBEM

• 1D: -5.86%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 21.92%
• 6M: 22.38%
• 1Y: 44.01%
• 3Y*: 21.42%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMC vs. BBEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EMC Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF	20.87%	18.91%	3.75%	1.62%
BBEM JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF	21.92%	32.43%	5.61%	7.24%

Correlation

The correlation between EMC and BBEM is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2023	0.94

The correlation between EMC and BBEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMC vs. BBEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMC

EMC Risk / Return Rank: 46
EMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
EMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
EMC Omega Ratio Rank: 45
EMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
EMC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

BBEM

BBEM Risk / Return Rank: 67
BBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
BBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
BBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 69
BBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
BBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

EMC vs. BBEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) and JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM). 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.

	EMC	BBEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	1.98	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	2.57	-0.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.38	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.31	3.37	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.19	12.56	-4.38

EMC vs. BBEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is comparable to the BBEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMC and BBEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMC vs. BBEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMC drawdown since its inception was -18.38%, which is greater than BBEM's maximum drawdown of -17.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMC and BBEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMC	BBEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.38%	-17.42%	-0.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.89%	-13.12%	-0.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.38%	-17.42%	-0.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.16%	-5.86%	+0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.11%	-3.71%	-0.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.91%	3.51%	+0.40%

Volatility

EMC vs. BBEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) is 11.79%, while JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM) has a volatility of 12.60%. This indicates that EMC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BBEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMC	BBEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.79%	12.60%	-0.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.86%	20.54%	+0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.90%	22.39%	+0.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.30%	18.48%	+0.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.30%	18.48%	+0.82%

EMC vs. BBEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BBEM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMC vs. BBEM - Dividend Comparison

EMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than BBEM's 4.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BBEM JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF	4.78%	5.86%	2.73%	1.94%
EMC Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF	0.65%	0.78%	1.13%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMC and BBEM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, EMC and BBEM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EMC or BBEM?

BBEM has higher volatility (12.60%) compared to EMC (11.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMC dropped -18.38% vs BBEM's -17.42%.

Which ETF is better, EMC or BBEM?

On 3-year performance, BBEM leads with 21.42% vs 15.69% for EMC. On fees, BBEM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EMC has been the lower-risk option at 11.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMC or BBEM?

Over the 3-year period, BBEM has performed better with a 21.42% return vs 15.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMC or BBEM?

BBEM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMC or BBEM?

BBEM has the higher dividend yield at 4.78%, compared with 0.65% for EMC.

What is the main difference between EMC and BBEM?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMC and 0.15% for BBEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BBEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 1.40), 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.