PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMEQ vs. EMSF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMEQ achieves a 77.86% return, which is significantly higher than EMSF's 45.49% return.


EMEQ

1D
-8.46%
1M
12.67%
YTD
77.86%
6M
84.70%
1Y
148.00%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

EMSF

1D
-6.10%
1M
5.39%
YTD
45.49%
6M
45.93%
1Y
58.48%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between EMEQ and EMSF is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024

0.85

The correlation between EMEQ and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

EMEQ vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMEQ
EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

EMSF
EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.


EMEQEMSFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.90

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.37

+0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

8.31

4.03

+4.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

30.81

13.14

+17.67

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMEQ Sharpe Ratio is 3.98, which is higher than the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMEQ and EMSF, 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

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMEQ drawdown since its inception was -19.99%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMEQ and EMSF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMEQEMSFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.99%

-24.75%

+4.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.91%

-14.57%

-3.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.46%

-6.10%

-2.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.03%

-5.72%

+1.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.82%

4.46%

+0.36%

Volatility

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a higher volatility of 21.89% compared to Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) at 14.20%. This indicates that EMEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMEQEMSFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

21.89%

14.20%

+7.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

34.54%

24.49%

+10.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.38%

28.21%

+9.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.96%

23.87%

+9.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.96%

23.87%

+9.09%

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMEQ has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is higher than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMEQ vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

EMEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.55%, more than EMSF's 1.29% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
EMEQ
Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF
1.55%2.76%0.84%0.00%
EMSF
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF
1.29%1.88%3.29%0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMEQ and EMSF have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMEQ has higher volatility (21.89%) compared to EMSF (14.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMEQ dropped -19.99% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 148.00% vs 58.48% for EMSF. On fees, EMSF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, EMSF has been the lower-risk option at 14.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 148.00% return vs 58.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMSF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

EMEQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 1.29% for EMSF.

They also come from different issuers: Nomura and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.86% for EMEQ and 0.79% for EMSF.

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 vs 2.08), 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 EMEQ and EMSF

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