EMEQ vs. CRAK

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and CRAK (VanEck Oil Refiners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMEQ is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Nomura, while CRAK is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Oil Refiners Index. EMEQ is actively managed, while CRAK is passively managed. Over the past year, EMEQ returned 141.42% vs 55.23% for CRAK. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMEQ charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for CRAK.

Performance

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) and VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMEQ achieves a 70.13% return, which is significantly higher than CRAK's 29.26% return.

EMEQ

• 1D: 0.81%
• 1M: 10.20%
• YTD: 70.13%
• 6M: 81.37%
• 1Y: 141.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CRAK

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -1.57%
• YTD: 29.26%
• 6M: 26.17%
• 1Y: 55.23%
• 3Y*: 20.46%
• 5Y*: 13.12%
• 10Y*: 13.50%

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

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	70.13%	69.78%	-0.73%
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	29.26%	39.11%	-15.88%

Correlation

The correlation between EMEQ and CRAK is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.37

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMEQ	CRAK
Financial Services	6.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	-
Communication Services	2.4%	-
Healthcare	1.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.2%
Energy	1.3%	98.8%
Technology	1.1%	-
Utilities	0.9%	-
Industrials	0.3%	4.0%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

EMEQ vs. CRAK — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 95
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 94
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 95

CRAK

CRAK Risk / Return Rank: 92
CRAK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CRAK Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
CRAK Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CRAK Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
CRAK 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.

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) and VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK). 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.

	EMEQ	CRAK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.89	2.98	+0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.03	3.91	+0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.50	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.71	6.49	+1.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	28.78	17.24	+11.54

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMEQ Sharpe Ratio is 3.89, which is higher than the CRAK Sharpe Ratio of 2.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMEQ and CRAK, 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

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMEQ drawdown since its inception was -19.99%, smaller than the maximum CRAK drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMEQ and CRAK.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMEQ	CRAK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.99%	-58.80%	+38.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.91%	-8.57%	-9.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.61%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-58.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.69%	-6.68%	+0.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.05%	-12.48%	+8.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.79%	3.22%	+1.57%

Volatility

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Volatility Comparison

Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a higher volatility of 19.34% compared to VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) at 5.81%. This indicates that EMEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRAK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMEQ	CRAK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.34%	5.81%	+13.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.54%	14.72%	+17.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.48%	18.66%	+16.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.87%	20.67%	+11.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.87%	22.17%	+9.70%

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMEQ has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is higher than CRAK's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMEQ vs. CRAK - Dividend Comparison

EMEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, more than CRAK's 1.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF	1.56%	2.02%	5.60%	3.65%	3.08%	2.40%	2.64%	1.49%	2.42%	1.66%	3.42%	0.47%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.62%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMEQ and CRAK in my portfolio?

EMEQ and CRAK have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMEQ or CRAK?

EMEQ has higher volatility (19.34%) compared to CRAK (5.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMEQ dropped -19.99% vs CRAK's -58.80%.

Which ETF is better, EMEQ or CRAK?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 141.42% vs 55.23% for CRAK. On fees, CRAK is cheaper at 0.62% per year. On volatility, CRAK has been the lower-risk option at 5.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMEQ or CRAK?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 141.42% return vs 55.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMEQ or CRAK?

CRAK is cheaper with a 0.62% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMEQ or CRAK?

EMEQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.62%, compared with 1.56% for CRAK.

What is the main difference between EMEQ and CRAK?

EMEQ is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while CRAK is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Nomura and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.86% for EMEQ and 0.62% for CRAK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.89 vs 2.98), 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.