EMDV vs. XCEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMDV (ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMDV tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMDV returned 2.64%/yr vs 12.99%/yr for XCEM. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMDV charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.

Performance

EMDV vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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 XCEM's 38.32% return. Over the past 10 years, EMDV has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 2.64%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 12.99% 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%

XCEM

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 12.13%
• YTD: 38.32%
• 6M: 44.13%
• 1Y: 71.14%
• 3Y*: 26.37%
• 5Y*: 11.95%
• 10Y*: 12.99%

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

EMDV vs. XCEM - 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%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	38.32%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	34.78%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDV and XCEM is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2016	0.69

The correlation between EMDV and XCEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMDV vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMDV	XCEM
Financial Services	24.1%	7.7%
Technology	22.5%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	16.4%	0.3%
Utilities	8.3%	1.9%
Healthcare	8.2%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	1.1%
Communication Services	6.2%	4.2%
Industrials	6.2%	0.4%
Basic Materials	1.9%	0.7%
Energy	-	0.2%
Real Estate	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

EMDV vs. XCEM — 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

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 90
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	3.42	-2.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.07	4.27	-3.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.61	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.09	4.95	-3.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.33	19.98	-16.65
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. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDV and XCEM, 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	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.71	3.42	-2.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.21	0.68	-0.88
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.15	0.66	-0.52
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.22	0.63	-0.42

Drawdowns

EMDV vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDV drawdown since its inception was -39.20%, roughly equal to the maximum XCEM drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDV and XCEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMDV	XCEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.20%	-41.24%	+2.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.24%	-14.46%	+7.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.71%	-18.92%	-1.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.97%	-29.67%	-5.30%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.20%	-41.24%	+2.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.80%	-1.25%	-13.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.55%	-8.59%	-4.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.37%	3.57%	-1.20%

Volatility

EMDV vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) is 4.17%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that EMDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMDV	XCEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.17%	9.43%	-5.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.21%	18.72%	-9.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.21%	20.89%	-9.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.42%	17.75%	-2.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.26%	19.72%	-1.46%

EMDV vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMDV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMDV vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

EMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than XCEM's 2.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	2.35%	3.25%	2.76%	1.22%	2.42%	1.94%	1.63%	2.11%	2.70%	9.56%	1.24%	2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMDV and XCEM in my portfolio?

EMDV and XCEM have a correlation of 0.71, 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 XCEM?

XCEM has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to EMDV (4.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMDV dropped -39.20% vs XCEM's -41.24%.

Which ETF is better, EMDV or XCEM?

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 12.99% vs 2.64% for EMDV. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% 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 XCEM?

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 12.99% 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 XCEM?

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMDV.

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

EMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 2.35% for XCEM.

What is the main difference between EMDV and XCEM?

EMDV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for EMDV and 0.16% for XCEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 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.