EMC vs. EMSF
EMC (Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMC returned 39.53% vs 63.33% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.
Performance
EMC vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMC achieves a 25.25% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 45.34% return.
EMC
- 1D
- -1.64%
- 1M
- 9.84%
- YTD
- 25.25%
- 6M
- 27.29%
- 1Y
- 39.53%
- 3Y*
- 17.56%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMSF
- 1D
- -1.10%
- 1M
- 8.61%
- YTD
- 45.34%
- 6M
- 40.08%
- 1Y
- 63.33%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMC vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EMC Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF | 25.25% | 18.91% | 3.75% | 6.21% |
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF | 45.34% | 19.20% | -3.09% | 1.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMC and EMSF is 0.93, 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 | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2023 | 0.88 |
The correlation between EMC and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
EMC vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EMC
EMSF
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Utilities
-
Technology
EMC
EMSF
Financial Services
EMC
EMSF
Consumer Cyclical
EMC
EMSF
Communication Services
EMC
EMSF
Industrials
EMC
EMSF
Basic Materials
EMC
EMSF
-
Energy
EMC
EMSF
-
Healthcare
EMC
EMSF
Consumer Defensive
EMC
EMSF
Real Estate
EMC
EMSF
Utilities
EMC
-
EMSF
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
EMC vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank
EMC
EMSF
EMC vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.
| EMC | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.92 | 2.51 | -0.59 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.66 | 3.14 | -0.48 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.43 | -0.08 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.86 | 4.37 | -1.51 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.54 | 14.61 | -4.08 |
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
| EMC | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.92 | 2.51 | -0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.87 | 0.98 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
EMC vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMC drawdown since its inception was -18.38%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMC and EMSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMC | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.38% | -24.75% | +6.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.89% | -14.57% | +0.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.38% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.64% | -1.10% | -0.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.11% | -5.72% | +1.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.76% | 4.35% | -0.59% |
Volatility
EMC vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF (EMC) is 9.03%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 9.96%. This indicates that EMC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMC | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.03% | 9.96% | -0.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.24% | 21.98% | -3.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.68% | 25.35% | -4.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.55% | 22.75% | -4.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.55% | 22.75% | -4.20% |
EMC vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMC vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison
EMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, less than EMSF's 1.30% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EMC Global X Emerging Markets Great Consumer ETF | 0.63% | 0.78% | 1.13% | 0.89% |
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF | 1.30% | 1.88% | 3.29% | 0.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, EMC and EMSF 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.
EMSF has higher volatility (9.96%) compared to EMC (9.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMC dropped -18.38% vs EMSF's -24.75%.
On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 63.33% vs 39.53% for EMC. On fees, EMC is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, EMC has been the lower-risk option at 9.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 63.33% return vs 39.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMC is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.
EMSF has the higher dividend yield at 1.30%, compared with 0.63% for EMC.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMC and 0.79% for EMSF.
EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 1.92), 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 EMC and EMSF
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