PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMES vs. DFEV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMES vs. DFEV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Value ETF (DFEV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with EMES having a 28.30% return and DFEV slightly higher at 29.46%.


EMES

1D
-1.25%
1M
5.92%
YTD
28.30%
6M
29.99%
1Y
46.81%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

DFEV

1D
-1.36%
1M
9.10%
YTD
29.46%
6M
32.40%
1Y
57.15%
3Y*
25.84%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMES vs. DFEV - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between EMES and DFEV is 0.86, 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

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2025

0.86

The correlation between EMES and DFEV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMES vs. DFEV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMES
DFEV

Technology

42.9%
28.6%

Industrials

16.3%
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

14.8%
10.5%

Financial Services

14.2%
16.8%

Communication Services

4.7%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.1%
3.4%

Real Estate

3.0%
1.6%

Healthcare

1.1%
3.3%

Basic Materials

-

7.4%

Energy

-

7.6%

Utilities

-

0.8%

Technology

EMES
42.9%
DFEV
28.6%

Industrials

EMES
16.3%
DFEV
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

EMES
14.8%
DFEV
10.5%

Financial Services

EMES
14.2%
DFEV
16.8%

Communication Services

EMES
4.7%
DFEV
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

EMES
3.1%
DFEV
3.4%

Real Estate

EMES
3.0%
DFEV
1.6%

Healthcare

EMES
1.1%
DFEV
3.3%

Basic Materials

EMES

-

DFEV
7.4%

Energy

EMES

-

DFEV
7.6%

Utilities

EMES

-

DFEV
0.8%

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

EMES vs. DFEV — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMES
EMES Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
EMES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMES Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMES Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
EMES Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMES Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

DFEV
DFEV Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
DFEV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFEV Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFEV Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
DFEV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFEV Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

EMES vs. DFEV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Value ETF (DFEV). 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.


EMESDFEVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.61

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.62

5.06

-1.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.07

19.06

-5.00

EMES vs. DFEV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMES Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is lower than the DFEV Sharpe Ratio of 3.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMES and DFEV, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMESDFEVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.25

3.32

-1.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.06

1.11

+0.95

Drawdowns

EMES vs. DFEV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMES drawdown since its inception was -12.98%, smaller than the maximum DFEV drawdown of -18.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMES and DFEV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMESDFEVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.98%

-18.49%

+5.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.98%

-11.35%

-1.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.94%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-1.36%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.07%

-4.65%

+2.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.34%

3.01%

+0.33%

Volatility

EMES vs. DFEV - Volatility Comparison

Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) has a higher volatility of 8.70% compared to Dimensional Emerging Markets Value ETF (DFEV) at 7.73%. This indicates that EMES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFEV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMESDFEVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.70%

7.73%

+0.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.31%

14.85%

+3.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.89%

17.31%

+3.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.56%

16.42%

+4.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.56%

16.42%

+4.14%

EMES vs. DFEV - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMES has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than DFEV's 0.43% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMES vs. DFEV - Dividend Comparison

EMES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than DFEV's 2.02% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
DFEV
Dimensional Emerging Markets Value ETF
2.02%2.69%3.17%3.47%3.35%
EMES
Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF
0.42%0.53%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMES and DFEV have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMES has higher volatility (8.70%) compared to DFEV (7.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMES dropped -12.98% vs DFEV's -18.49%.

On 1-year performance, DFEV leads with 57.15% vs 46.81% for EMES. On fees, DFEV is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, DFEV has been the lower-risk option at 7.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, DFEV has performed better with a 57.15% return vs 46.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DFEV is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for EMES.

DFEV has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 0.42% for EMES.

They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EMES and 0.43% for DFEV.

DFEV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.32 vs 2.25), 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 EMES and DFEV

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