EMES vs. XC
EMES (Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF) and XC (WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. EMES is actively managed, while XC is passively managed. Over the past year, EMES returned 46.81% vs 8.33% for XC. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMES charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for XC.
Performance
EMES vs. XC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMES achieves a 28.30% return, which is significantly higher than XC's -3.47% return.
EMES
- 1D
- -1.25%
- 1M
- 5.92%
- YTD
- 28.30%
- 6M
- 29.99%
- 1Y
- 46.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XC
- 1D
- -1.53%
- 1M
- -1.76%
- YTD
- -3.47%
- 6M
- -2.10%
- 1Y
- 8.33%
- 3Y*
- 9.87%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMES vs. XC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EMES Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF | 28.30% | 12.63% |
XC WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | -3.47% | 11.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMES and XC is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2025 | 0.74 |
The correlation between EMES and XC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.
EMES vs. XC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EMES
XC
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
EMES
XC
Industrials
EMES
XC
Consumer Cyclical
EMES
XC
Financial Services
EMES
XC
Communication Services
EMES
XC
Consumer Defensive
EMES
XC
Real Estate
EMES
XC
Healthcare
EMES
XC
Basic Materials
EMES
-
XC
Energy
EMES
-
XC
Utilities
EMES
-
XC
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. XC — Risk / Return Rank
EMES
XC
EMES vs. XC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) and WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (XC). 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 | XC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.11 | +0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.62 | 0.67 | +2.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.07 | 1.94 | +12.12 |
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 | XC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.25 | 0.57 | +1.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.06 | 0.71 | +1.35 |
Drawdowns
EMES vs. XC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMES drawdown since its inception was -12.98%, smaller than the maximum XC drawdown of -20.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMES and XC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMES | XC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.98% | -20.97% | +7.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.98% | -12.47% | -0.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.97% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.25% | -9.35% | +8.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.07% | -4.12% | +2.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.34% | 4.29% | -0.95% |
Volatility
EMES vs. XC - Volatility Comparison
Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) has a higher volatility of 8.70% compared to WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (XC) at 5.00%. This indicates that EMES's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMES | XC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.70% | 5.00% | +3.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.31% | 12.60% | +5.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.89% | 14.78% | +6.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.56% | 15.87% | +4.69% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.56% | 15.87% | +4.69% |
EMES vs. XC - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMES has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than XC's 0.32% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMES vs. XC - Dividend Comparison
EMES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than XC's 12.41% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMES Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF | 0.42% | 0.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XC WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | 12.41% | 11.74% | 1.49% | 1.42% | 0.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMES and XC have a correlation of 0.74, 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 XC (5.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMES dropped -12.98% vs XC's -20.97%.
On 1-year performance, EMES leads with 46.81% vs 8.33% for XC. On fees, XC is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, XC has been the lower-risk option at 5.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EMES has performed better with a 46.81% return vs 8.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XC is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for EMES.
XC has the higher dividend yield at 12.41%, compared with 0.42% for EMES.
They also come from different issuers: Harbor and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for EMES and 0.32% for XC.
EMES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 0.57), 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 XC
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