EMDV vs. DBEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMDV (ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF) and DBEM (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMDV tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index while DBEM tracks the MSCI EM US Dollar Hedged Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMDV returned 2.64%/yr vs 10.73%/yr for DBEM. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMDV charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for DBEM.

Performance

EMDV vs. DBEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMDV achieves a 1.17% return, which is significantly lower than DBEM's 32.18% return. Over the past 10 years, EMDV has underperformed DBEM with an annualized return of 2.64%, while DBEM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.73% annualized return.

EMDV

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: 0.78%
• YTD: 1.17%
• 6M: 1.13%
• 1Y: 7.88%
• 3Y*: 2.77%
• 5Y*: -3.15%
• 10Y*: 2.64%

DBEM

• 1D: -0.69%
• 1M: 10.58%
• YTD: 32.18%
• 6M: 34.98%
• 1Y: 64.04%
• 3Y*: 25.82%
• 5Y*: 9.74%
• 10Y*: 10.73%

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

EMDV vs. DBEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMDV ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF	1.17%	11.90%	0.06%	-1.03%	-18.19%	1.11%	-0.09%	14.93%	-7.52%	26.98%
DBEM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF	32.18%	30.42%	10.61%	10.53%	-17.00%	-2.26%	18.12%	16.77%	-10.81%	27.10%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDV and DBEM is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2016	0.77

The correlation between EMDV and DBEM shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.79 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMDV vs. DBEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMDV	DBEM
Financial Services	24.1%	19.6%
Technology	22.5%	36.4%
Consumer Defensive	16.4%	3.0%
Utilities	8.3%	2.1%
Healthcare	8.2%	2.9%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	9.6%
Communication Services	6.2%	7.0%
Industrials	6.2%	7.6%
Basic Materials	1.9%	6.6%
Energy	-	4.1%
Real Estate	-	1.1%

Return for Risk

EMDV vs. DBEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMDV

EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 22
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 20
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 24

DBEM

DBEM Risk / Return Rank: 93
DBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
DBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
DBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 93
DBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
DBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

EMDV vs. DBEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM). 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.

	EMDV	DBEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	3.58	-2.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.07	4.62	-3.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.64	-0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.09	6.13	-5.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.33	24.38	-21.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMDV vs. DBEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the DBEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDV and DBEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMDV	DBEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.71	3.58	-2.88
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.21	0.57	-0.78
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.15	0.63	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.22	0.34	-0.12

Drawdowns

EMDV vs. DBEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDV drawdown since its inception was -39.20%, which is greater than DBEM's maximum drawdown of -33.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDV and DBEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMDV	DBEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.20%	-33.51%	-5.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.24%	-10.51%	+3.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.71%	-15.12%	-5.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.97%	-30.48%	-4.49%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.20%	-33.51%	-5.69%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.80%	-0.69%	-14.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.55%	-11.69%	-1.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.37%	2.63%	-0.26%

Volatility

EMDV vs. DBEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) is 4.17%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) has a volatility of 7.53%. This indicates that EMDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DBEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMDV	DBEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.17%	7.53%	-3.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.21%	15.53%	-6.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.21%	17.96%	-6.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.42%	17.08%	-1.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.26%	17.14%	+1.12%

EMDV vs. DBEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMDV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than DBEM's 0.66% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMDV vs. DBEM - Dividend Comparison

EMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than DBEM's 1.39% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DBEM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF	1.39%	1.84%	2.48%	2.55%	2.65%	1.77%	1.74%	2.59%	2.85%	1.51%	1.59%	3.49%
EMDV ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF	2.41%	2.46%	2.79%	1.88%	3.68%	2.12%	3.12%	2.38%	1.27%	2.09%	2.87%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMDV and DBEM in my portfolio?

EMDV and DBEM have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMDV or DBEM?

DBEM has higher volatility (7.53%) compared to EMDV (4.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMDV dropped -39.20% vs DBEM's -33.51%.

Which ETF is better, EMDV or DBEM?

On 10-year performance, DBEM leads with 10.73% vs 2.64% for EMDV. On fees, EMDV is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, EMDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMDV or DBEM?

Over the 10-year period, DBEM has performed better with a 10.73% return vs 2.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMDV or DBEM?

EMDV is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DBEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMDV or DBEM?

EMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 1.39% for DBEM.

What is the main difference between EMDV and DBEM?

EMDV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index, while DBEM tracks MSCI EM US Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for EMDV and 0.66% for DBEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DBEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.58 vs 0.71), 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.