PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMF vs. FRDPX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMF vs. FRDPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) and Franklin Rising Dividends Fund (FRDPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMF achieves a 41.37% return, which is significantly higher than FRDPX's 5.86% return. Over the past 10 years, EMF has outperformed FRDPX with an annualized return of 15.64%, while FRDPX has yielded a comparatively lower 11.41% 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%

FRDPX

1D
0.47%
1M
3.39%
YTD
5.86%
6M
5.39%
1Y
15.37%
3Y*
12.13%
5Y*
8.57%
10Y*
11.41%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMF vs. FRDPX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
FRDPX
Franklin Rising Dividends Fund
5.86%11.96%10.92%12.10%-10.69%26.62%16.29%29.83%-5.27%17.33%

Correlation

The correlation between EMF and FRDPX is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.36

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.40

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.43

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 1990

0.47

The correlation between EMF and FRDPX shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.50 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

EMF vs. FRDPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMF
EMF Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
EMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMF Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
EMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMF Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

FRDPX
FRDPX Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
FRDPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRDPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRDPX Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
FRDPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRDPX Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
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.

EMF vs. FRDPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) and Franklin Rising Dividends Fund (FRDPX). 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.


EMFFRDPXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.73

1.28

+0.45

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.82

2.28

+2.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.26

8.91

+10.34

EMF vs. FRDPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMF Sharpe Ratio is 4.12, which is higher than the FRDPX Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMF and FRDPX, 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


EMFFRDPXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.12

1.60

+2.52

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.57

0.56

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

0.67

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.23

0.61

-0.38

Drawdowns

EMF vs. FRDPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMF drawdown since its inception was -76.97%, which is greater than FRDPX's maximum drawdown of -51.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMF and FRDPX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMFFRDPXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-76.97%

-51.57%

-25.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.48%

-7.10%

-12.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.48%

-18.26%

-1.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.62%

-21.07%

-24.55%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.65%

-34.89%

-12.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.78%

0.00%

-1.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-29.00%

-5.81%

-23.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.87%

1.82%

+3.05%

Volatility

EMF vs. FRDPX - Volatility Comparison

Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) has a higher volatility of 9.22% compared to Franklin Rising Dividends Fund (FRDPX) at 2.29%. This indicates that EMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FRDPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMFFRDPXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.22%

2.29%

+6.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.12%

7.70%

+12.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.81%

10.15%

+12.66%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.50%

15.36%

+5.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.58%

17.18%

+3.40%

EMF vs. FRDPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMF has a 1.43% expense ratio, which is higher than FRDPX's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMF vs. FRDPX - Dividend Comparison

EMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.97%, less than FRDPX's 9.66% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
FRDPX
Franklin Rising Dividends Fund
9.66%10.25%10.15%4.60%4.96%4.42%0.82%3.01%5.20%0.90%3.09%5.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMF and FRDPX have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMF has higher volatility (9.22%) compared to FRDPX (2.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMF dropped -76.97% vs FRDPX's -51.57%.

EMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.12 vs 1.60), 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 EMF and FRDPX

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