EMES vs. FRDM
EMES (Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF) and FRDM (Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. EMES is actively managed, while FRDM is passively managed. Over the past year, EMES returned 46.81% vs 97.46% for FRDM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMES charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FRDM.
Performance
EMES vs. FRDM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMES achieves a 28.30% return, which is significantly lower than FRDM's 44.61% return.
EMES
- 1D
- -1.25%
- 1M
- 5.92%
- YTD
- 28.30%
- 6M
- 29.99%
- 1Y
- 46.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FRDM
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- 17.06%
- YTD
- 44.61%
- 6M
- 53.16%
- 1Y
- 97.46%
- 3Y*
- 37.08%
- 5Y*
- 19.30%
- 10Y*
- —
EMES vs. FRDM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EMES Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF | 28.30% | 12.63% |
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF | 44.61% | 35.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMES and FRDM is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2025 | 0.87 |
The correlation between EMES and FRDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
EMES vs. FRDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EMES
FRDM
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
EMES
FRDM
Industrials
EMES
FRDM
Consumer Cyclical
EMES
FRDM
Financial Services
EMES
FRDM
Communication Services
EMES
FRDM
Consumer Defensive
EMES
FRDM
Real Estate
EMES
FRDM
Healthcare
EMES
FRDM
Basic Materials
EMES
-
FRDM
Energy
EMES
-
FRDM
Utilities
EMES
-
FRDM
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. FRDM — Risk / Return Rank
EMES
FRDM
EMES vs. FRDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). 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.
| EMES | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.67 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.62 | 5.81 | -2.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.07 | 23.37 | -9.30 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMES | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.25 | 4.00 | -1.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.93 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.06 | 0.85 | +1.21 |
Drawdowns
EMES vs. FRDM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMES drawdown since its inception was -12.98%, smaller than the maximum FRDM drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMES and FRDM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMES | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.98% | -40.49% | +27.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.98% | -16.87% | +3.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.87% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | -1.30% | +0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.07% | -7.09% | +5.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.34% | 4.18% | -0.84% |
Volatility
EMES vs. FRDM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) is 8.70%, while Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM) has a volatility of 11.03%. This indicates that EMES experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMES | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.70% | 11.03% | -2.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.31% | 21.65% | -3.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.89% | 24.50% | -3.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.56% | 20.80% | -0.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.56% | 22.77% | -2.21% |
EMES vs. FRDM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMES has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FRDM's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMES vs. FRDM - Dividend Comparison
EMES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than FRDM's 1.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMES Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF | 0.42% | 0.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF | 1.51% | 2.26% | 2.53% | 2.66% | 2.72% | 2.17% | 1.11% | 1.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMES and FRDM have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FRDM has higher volatility (11.03%) compared to EMES (8.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMES dropped -12.98% vs FRDM's -40.49%.
On 1-year performance, FRDM leads with 97.46% vs 46.81% for EMES. On fees, FRDM is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, EMES has been the lower-risk option at 8.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FRDM has performed better with a 97.46% return vs 46.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FRDM is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for EMES.
FRDM has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 0.42% for EMES.
They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Freedom Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EMES and 0.49% for FRDM.
FRDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.00 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.
Find the right allocation for EMES and FRDM
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