EMCS vs. EMOP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMCS (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF) and EMOP (AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. EMCS is passively managed, while EMOP is actively managed. Over the past year, EMCS returned 55.24% vs 47.69% for EMOP. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMCS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for EMOP.

Performance

EMCS vs. EMOP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMCS achieves a 30.08% return, which is significantly higher than EMOP's 27.21% return.

EMCS

• 1D: -6.03%
• 1M: 5.49%
• YTD: 30.08%
• 6M: 31.16%
• 1Y: 55.24%
• 3Y*: 26.52%
• 5Y*: 7.51%
• 10Y*: —

EMOP

• 1D: -4.78%
• 1M: 1.88%
• YTD: 27.21%
• 6M: 28.58%
• 1Y: 47.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMCS vs. EMOP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	30.08%	19.59%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	27.21%	16.48%

Correlation

The correlation between EMCS and EMOP 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 Jun 18, 2025	0.93

The correlation between EMCS and EMOP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMCS vs. EMOP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMCS	EMOP
Technology	50.7%	30.3%
Financial Services	26.0%	24.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	7.8%
Communication Services	7.4%	12.3%
Basic Materials	2.6%	7.0%
Real Estate	1.8%	2.3%
Industrials	1.2%	8.1%
Energy	1.2%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	1.4%
Healthcare	0.0%	1.6%
Utilities	0.0%	2.8%

Return for Risk

EMCS vs. EMOP — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMCS

EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 75
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 76
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 80

EMOP

EMOP Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EMOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
EMOP Omega Ratio Rank: 78
EMOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EMOP Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

EMCS vs. EMOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). 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.

	EMCS	EMOP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	2.21	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	2.81	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.41	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.88	3.72	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.31	13.88	+0.42

EMCS vs. EMOP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMCS Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the EMOP Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMCS and EMOP, 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

EMCS vs. EMOP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMCS drawdown since its inception was -44.86%, which is greater than EMOP's maximum drawdown of -12.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMCS and EMOP.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMCS	EMOP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.86%	-12.88%	-31.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.32%	-12.88%	-1.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.03%	-4.78%	-1.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.52%	-2.00%	-14.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.87%	3.44%	+0.43%

Volatility

EMCS vs. EMOP - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a higher volatility of 14.09% compared to AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP) at 10.76%. This indicates that EMCS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMOP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMCS	EMOP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.09%	10.76%	+3.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.01%	19.59%	+3.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.41%	21.65%	+3.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.33%	21.57%	-0.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.04%	21.57%	+0.47%

EMCS vs. EMOP - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMCS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than EMOP's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMCS vs. EMOP - Dividend Comparison

EMCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, more than EMOP's 0.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	1.46%	1.66%	0.67%	3.07%	2.26%	1.46%	1.40%	3.56%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	0.85%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMCS and EMOP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, EMCS and EMOP 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, EMCS or EMOP?

EMCS has higher volatility (14.09%) compared to EMOP (10.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMCS dropped -44.86% vs EMOP's -12.88%.

Which ETF is better, EMCS or EMOP?

On 1-year performance, EMCS leads with 55.24% vs 47.69% for EMOP. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EMOP has been the lower-risk option at 10.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMCS or EMOP?

Over the 1-year period, EMCS has performed better with a 55.24% return vs 47.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMCS or EMOP?

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for EMOP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMCS or EMOP?

EMCS has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 0.85% for EMOP.

What is the main difference between EMCS and EMOP?

They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for EMCS and 0.70% for EMOP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMOP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 2.19), 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.