EMF vs. CNWIX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMF (Templeton Emerging Markets Fund) and CNWIX (Calamos Evolving World Growth Fund Class I) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, EMF returned 15.64%/yr vs 12.33%/yr for CNWIX. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMF charges 1.43%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for CNWIX.

Performance

EMF vs. CNWIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) and Calamos Evolving World Growth Fund Class I (CNWIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMF achieves a 41.37% return, which is significantly lower than CNWIX's 51.09% return. Over the past 10 years, EMF has outperformed CNWIX with an annualized return of 15.64%, while CNWIX has yielded a comparatively lower 12.33% annualized return.

EMF

• 1D: -1.78%
• 1M: 14.71%
• YTD: 41.37%
• 6M: 49.61%
• 1Y: 93.36%
• 3Y*: 36.22%
• 5Y*: 11.63%
• 10Y*: 15.64%

CNWIX

• 1D: 1.17%
• 1M: 14.41%
• YTD: 51.09%
• 6M: 54.41%
• 1Y: 72.44%
• 3Y*: 29.77%
• 5Y*: 8.94%
• 10Y*: 12.33%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMF vs. CNWIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMF Templeton Emerging Markets Fund	41.37%	58.20%	6.56%	8.84%	-21.53%	-8.23%	24.48%	27.20%	-14.78%	53.55%
CNWIX Calamos Evolving World Growth Fund Class I	51.09%	19.29%	14.99%	6.60%	-24.35%	-4.70%	54.23%	20.76%	-17.74%	36.97%

Correlation

The correlation between EMF and CNWIX is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2008	0.80

The correlation between EMF and CNWIX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMF vs. CNWIX — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMF

EMF Risk / Return Rank: 94
EMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
EMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EMF Omega Ratio Rank: 94
EMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
EMF Martin Ratio Rank: 92

CNWIX

CNWIX Risk / Return Rank: 86
CNWIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CNWIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
CNWIX Omega Ratio Rank: 84
CNWIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CNWIX Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

EMF vs. CNWIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) and Calamos Evolving World Growth Fund Class I (CNWIX). 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.

	EMF	CNWIX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.12	3.17	+0.94
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.88	3.79	+1.09
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.73	1.57	+0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.82	4.48	+0.34
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.26	16.56	+2.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMF vs. CNWIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMF Sharpe Ratio is 4.12, which is comparable to the CNWIX Sharpe Ratio of 3.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMF and CNWIX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMF	CNWIX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.12	3.17	+0.94
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57	0.49	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76	0.51	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	0.36	-0.13

Drawdowns

EMF vs. CNWIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMF drawdown since its inception was -76.97%, which is greater than CNWIX's maximum drawdown of -43.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMF and CNWIX.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMF	CNWIX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-76.97%	-43.57%	-33.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.48%	-16.28%	-3.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.48%	-19.34%	-0.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.62%	-37.36%	-8.26%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-47.65%	-43.57%	-4.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.78%	0.00%	-1.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.00%	-16.43%	-12.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.87%	4.39%	+0.48%

Volatility

EMF vs. CNWIX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) is 9.22%, while Calamos Evolving World Growth Fund Class I (CNWIX) has a volatility of 10.53%. This indicates that EMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNWIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMF	CNWIX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.22%	10.53%	-1.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.12%	20.15%	-0.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.81%	22.99%	-0.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.50%	18.45%	+2.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.58%	24.47%	-3.89%

EMF vs. CNWIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMF has a 1.43% expense ratio, which is higher than CNWIX's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMF vs. CNWIX - Dividend Comparison

EMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.97%, more than CNWIX's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNWIX Calamos Evolving World Growth Fund Class I	0.04%	0.06%	0.00%	0.54%	0.97%	2.79%	2.01%	1.04%	0.00%	0.42%	0.00%	0.38%
EMF Templeton Emerging Markets Fund	6.97%	9.73%	4.28%	6.22%	9.89%	6.92%	3.51%	7.36%	5.92%	12.11%	1.62%	12.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMF and CNWIX in my portfolio?

EMF and CNWIX have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMF or CNWIX?

CNWIX has higher volatility (10.53%) compared to EMF (9.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMF dropped -76.97% vs CNWIX's -43.57%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.12 vs 3.17), 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.