PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMDV vs. NOBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMDV vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMDV achieves a -0.55% return, which is significantly lower than NOBL's 5.77% return. Over the past 10 years, EMDV has underperformed NOBL with an annualized return of 2.58%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively higher 9.90% annualized return.


EMDV

1D
0.25%
1M
-1.09%
YTD
-0.55%
6M
-1.04%
1Y
6.45%
3Y*
2.73%
5Y*
-3.06%
10Y*
2.58%

NOBL

1D
-0.33%
1M
1.59%
YTD
5.77%
6M
4.96%
1Y
13.10%
3Y*
8.26%
5Y*
6.14%
10Y*
9.90%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMDV vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
-0.55%11.90%0.06%-1.03%-18.19%1.11%-0.09%14.93%-7.52%26.98%
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
5.77%6.84%6.72%8.09%-6.52%25.46%8.35%27.39%-3.26%21.02%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDV and NOBL is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.35

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2016

0.46

The correlation between EMDV and NOBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (1 year) to 0.46 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMDV vs. NOBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMDV
NOBL

Technology

24.7%
4.6%

Financial Services

23.4%
12.8%

Consumer Defensive

15.8%
23.6%

Utilities

8.2%
5.7%

Healthcare

7.7%
10.2%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
5.3%

Industrials

5.9%
20.2%

Communication Services

5.7%

-

Basic Materials

2.1%
10.2%

Energy

-

2.9%

Real Estate

-

4.6%

Technology

EMDV
24.7%
NOBL
4.6%

Financial Services

EMDV
23.4%
NOBL
12.8%

Consumer Defensive

EMDV
15.8%
NOBL
23.6%

Utilities

EMDV
8.2%
NOBL
5.7%

Healthcare

EMDV
7.7%
NOBL
10.2%

Consumer Cyclical

EMDV
6.5%
NOBL
5.3%

Industrials

EMDV
5.9%
NOBL
20.2%

Communication Services

EMDV
5.7%
NOBL

-

Basic Materials

EMDV
2.1%
NOBL
10.2%

Energy

EMDV

-

NOBL
2.9%

Real Estate

EMDV

-

NOBL
4.6%

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

EMDV vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMDV
EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

NOBL
NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
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. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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.


EMDVNOBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.20

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.89

1.44

-0.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.57

3.67

-1.10

EMDV vs. NOBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is lower than the NOBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDV and NOBL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

EMDV vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDV drawdown since its inception was -39.20%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDV and NOBL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMDVNOBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.20%

-35.43%

-3.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.24%

-9.11%

+1.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.71%

-15.36%

-5.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.13%

-17.92%

-16.21%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.20%

-35.43%

-3.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.25%

-3.94%

-12.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.55%

-3.48%

-10.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.52%

3.58%

-1.06%

Volatility

EMDV vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) has a higher volatility of 4.07% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 3.31%. This indicates that EMDV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMDVNOBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.07%

3.31%

+0.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.67%

8.20%

+1.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.48%

11.53%

-0.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.45%

14.38%

+1.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.19%

16.63%

+1.56%

EMDV vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMDV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMDV vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison

EMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, more than NOBL's 2.07% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
2.45%2.46%2.79%1.88%3.68%2.12%3.12%2.38%1.27%2.09%2.87%0.00%
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
2.07%2.14%2.05%2.09%1.94%1.89%2.14%1.89%2.37%1.74%2.13%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMDV and NOBL have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMDV has higher volatility (4.07%) compared to NOBL (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMDV dropped -39.20% vs NOBL's -35.43%.

On 10-year performance, NOBL leads with 9.90% vs 2.58% for EMDV. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, NOBL has performed better with a 9.90% return vs 2.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMDV.

EMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.45%, compared with 2.07% for NOBL.

EMDV is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while NOBL is Dividend. EMDV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index, while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for EMDV and 0.35% for NOBL.

NOBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.14 vs 0.57), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMDV and NOBL

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