EMEQ vs. EMSF
EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMEQ returned 113.64% vs 44.16% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.86 means they have usually moved in the same direction. EMEQ charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.
Performance
EMEQ vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMEQ achieves a 55.77% return, which is significantly higher than EMSF's 32.23% return.
EMEQ
- 1D
- 1.31%
- 1M
- -7.03%
- 6M
- 33.20%
- YTD
- 55.77%
- 1Y
- 113.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 65.83%
EMSF
- 1D
- 1.15%
- 1M
- -7.30%
- 6M
- 18.36%
- YTD
- 32.23%
- 1Y
- 44.16%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.34%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $8.80M | $8.80M | $11.41M | |
| $153.53K | $123.94K | $184.31K |
EMEQ vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 55.77% | 69.78% | -0.73% |
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF | 32.23% | 19.20% | -2.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMEQ and EMSF is 0.91, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024 | 0.86 |
The correlation between EMEQ and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
EMEQ vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EMEQ
EMSF
Technology
Financial Services
Energy
-
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
-
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Technology
EMEQ
EMSF
Financial Services
EMEQ
EMSF
Energy
EMEQ
EMSF
-
Consumer Cyclical
EMEQ
EMSF
Industrials
EMEQ
EMSF
Communication Services
EMEQ
EMSF
Consumer Defensive
EMEQ
EMSF
Basic Materials
EMEQ
EMSF
-
Healthcare
EMEQ
EMSF
Utilities
EMEQ
EMSF
Real Estate
EMEQ
-
EMSF
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
EMEQ
EMSF
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.
| EMEQ | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.44 | 1.27 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.35 | 2.28 | +2.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.65 | 7.54 | +8.11 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMEQ vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMEQ drawdown since its inception was -26.25%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMEQ and EMSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMEQ | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.25% | -24.75% | -1.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -26.25% | -19.49% | -6.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -19.83% | -14.65% | -5.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.70% | -5.92% | +1.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.29% | 5.87% | +1.42% |
Volatility
EMEQ vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison
Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a higher volatility of 14.69% compared to Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) at 10.75%. 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
| EMEQ | EMSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 14.69% | 10.75% | +3.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 37.55% | 26.52% | +11.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.45% | 30.13% | +10.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 34.13% | 24.39% | +9.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 34.13% | 24.39% | +9.74% |
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 1.77%, more than EMSF's 1.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.77% | 2.76% | 0.84% | 0.00% |
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF | 1.42% | 1.88% | 3.29% | 0.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, EMEQ and EMSF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
EMEQ has higher volatility (14.69%) compared to EMSF (10.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMEQ dropped -26.25% vs EMSF's -24.75%.
On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 113.64% vs 44.16% for EMSF. On fees, EMSF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, EMSF has been the lower-risk option at 10.75%. 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 113.64% return vs 44.16%. 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 1.77%, compared with 1.42% 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 (2.83 vs 1.48), 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.
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