EMDM vs. RING

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) and RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMDM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net, while RING is a Gold fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMDM returned 30.34%/yr vs 44.87%/yr for RING. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMDM charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for RING.

Performance

EMDM vs. RING - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING). 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 RING's -5.54% return.

EMDM

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 2.00%
• YTD: 36.28%
• 6M: 42.03%
• 1Y: 83.08%
• 3Y*: 30.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RING

• 1D: 3.20%
• 1M: -14.81%
• YTD: -5.54%
• 6M: -4.18%
• 1Y: 54.08%
• 3Y*: 44.87%
• 5Y*: 18.76%
• 10Y*: 13.85%

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

EMDM vs. RING - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	36.28%	59.68%	-4.93%	14.75%
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	-5.54%	164.72%	15.98%	14.65%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDM and RING is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2023	0.47

The correlation between EMDM and RING has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMDM vs. RING - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMDM	RING
Technology	32.1%	-
Financial Services	27.2%	-
Basic Materials	15.1%	100.0%
Energy	6.3%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.0%	-
Communication Services	4.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	-
Industrials	3.3%	-
Utilities	1.9%	-
Healthcare	0.5%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EMDM vs. RING — 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

RING

RING Risk / Return Rank: 36
RING Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
RING Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
RING Omega Ratio Rank: 39
RING Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
RING Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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. RING - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) and iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING). 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	RING	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.21	1.20	+2.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.78	1.62	+2.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.23	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.18	1.59	+3.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.59	4.45	+16.14

EMDM vs. RING - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDM Sharpe Ratio is 3.21, which is higher than the RING Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDM and RING, 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. RING - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDM drawdown since its inception was -18.81%, smaller than the maximum RING drawdown of -79.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDM and RING.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMDM	RING	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.81%	-79.47%	+60.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.65%	-35.72%	+20.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.81%	-35.72%	+16.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-47.94%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-52.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.27%	-30.03%	+26.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.08%	-47.36%	+43.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.93%	12.74%	-8.81%

Volatility

EMDM vs. RING - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) is 12.16%, while iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) has a volatility of 16.83%. This indicates that EMDM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RING based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMDM	RING	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.16%	16.83%	-4.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.86%	39.11%	-16.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.23%	47.31%	-22.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.36%	36.81%	-16.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.36%	36.70%	-16.34%

EMDM vs. RING - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

EMDM vs. RING - Dividend Comparison

EMDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, more than RING's 0.89% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.62%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	0.89%	0.84%	1.43%	2.01%	2.29%	2.38%	0.83%	0.83%	0.70%	0.42%	1.41%	0.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMDM and RING in my portfolio?

EMDM and RING have a correlation of 0.53, 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 RING?

RING has higher volatility (16.83%) compared to EMDM (12.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMDM dropped -18.81% vs RING's -79.47%.

Which ETF is better, EMDM or RING?

On 3-year performance, RING leads with 44.87% vs 30.34% for EMDM. On fees, RING is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EMDM has been the lower-risk option at 12.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMDM or RING?

Over the 3-year period, RING has performed better with a 44.87% return vs 30.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMDM or RING?

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

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

EMDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.62%, compared with 0.89% for RING.

What is the main difference between EMDM and RING?

EMDM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while RING is Gold. EMDM tracks Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net, while RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMDM and 0.39% for RING.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.21 vs 1.20), 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.