EMDM vs. CCNR

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) and CCNR (ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMDM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net, while CCNR is a Natural Resources fund actively managed by ALPS. EMDM is passively managed, while CCNR is actively managed. Over the past year, EMDM returned 83.08% vs 55.12% for CCNR. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMDM charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for CCNR.

Performance

EMDM vs. CCNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) and ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMDM achieves a 36.28% return, which is significantly higher than CCNR's 21.92% return.

EMDM

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 6.11%
• YTD: 36.28%
• 6M: 42.03%
• 1Y: 83.08%
• 3Y*: 30.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CCNR

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: -3.42%
• YTD: 21.92%
• 6M: 23.45%
• 1Y: 55.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMDM vs. CCNR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	36.28%	59.68%	-12.05%
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	21.92%	46.48%	-7.79%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDM and CCNR is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2024	0.63

The correlation between EMDM and CCNR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMDM vs. CCNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMDM

EMDM Risk / Return Rank: 92
EMDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
EMDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
EMDM Omega Ratio Rank: 92
EMDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
EMDM Martin Ratio Rank: 92

CCNR

CCNR Risk / Return Rank: 93
CCNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CCNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
CCNR Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CCNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CCNR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

EMDM vs. CCNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) and ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR). 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.

	EMDM	CCNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.21	3.05	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.78	3.71	+0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.51	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.18	7.25	-2.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.59	25.70	-5.11

EMDM vs. CCNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDM Sharpe Ratio is 3.21, which is comparable to the CCNR Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDM and CCNR, 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

EMDM vs. CCNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDM drawdown since its inception was -18.81%, smaller than the maximum CCNR drawdown of -20.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDM and CCNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMDM	CCNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.81%	-20.06%	+1.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.65%	-7.85%	-7.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.81%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.27%	-5.21%	+1.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.08%	-3.58%	-0.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.93%	2.21%	+1.72%

Volatility

EMDM vs. CCNR - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) has a higher volatility of 12.16% compared to ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) at 6.78%. This indicates that EMDM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMDM	CCNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.16%	6.78%	+5.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.86%	13.94%	+8.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.23%	18.66%	+6.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.36%	20.14%	+0.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.36%	20.14%	+0.22%

EMDM vs. CCNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMDM has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CCNR's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMDM vs. CCNR - Dividend Comparison

EMDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, less than CCNR's 2.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	2.86%	3.48%	1.27%	0.00%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.62%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMDM and CCNR in my portfolio?

EMDM and CCNR have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMDM or CCNR?

EMDM has higher volatility (12.16%) compared to CCNR (6.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMDM dropped -18.81% vs CCNR's -20.06%.

Which ETF is better, EMDM or CCNR?

On 1-year performance, EMDM leads with 83.08% vs 55.12% for CCNR. On fees, CCNR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, CCNR has been the lower-risk option at 6.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMDM or CCNR?

Over the 1-year period, EMDM has performed better with a 83.08% return vs 55.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMDM or CCNR?

CCNR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMDM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMDM or CCNR?

CCNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 2.62% for EMDM.

What is the main difference between EMDM and CCNR?

EMDM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while CCNR is Natural Resources. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and ALPS. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMDM and 0.39% for CCNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.21 vs 3.05), 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.