EMKT vs. UMI
EMKT (Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMKT is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Lazard, while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. EMKT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.
Performance
EMKT vs. UMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMKT achieves a 21.28% return, which is significantly lower than UMI's 27.88% return.
EMKT
- 1D
- -1.83%
- 1M
- -5.71%
- 6M
- 15.02%
- YTD
- 21.28%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UMI
- 1D
- 1.18%
- 1M
- 5.45%
- 6M
- 26.23%
- YTD
- 27.88%
- 1Y
- 31.97%
- 3Y*
- 27.71%
- 5Y*
- 22.94%
- 10Y*
- —
EMKT vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EMKT Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF | 21.28% | -1.26% |
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 27.88% | 4.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMKT and UMI is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2025 | -0.18 |
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
EMKT vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank
EMKT
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
UMI
EMKT vs. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMKT) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| EMKT | UMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.38 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.28 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 10.78 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMKT vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMKT drawdown since its inception was -14.21%, smaller than the maximum UMI drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMKT and UMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMKT | UMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.21% | -48.08% | +33.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -7.50% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -17.08% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.05% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.72% | -0.59% | -8.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.33% | -6.56% | +3.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.97% | — |
Volatility
EMKT vs. UMI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMKT | UMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.12% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.42% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.39% | 14.60% | +10.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.39% | 19.46% | +5.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.39% | 23.13% | +2.26% |
EMKT vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMKT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMKT vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison
EMKT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, less than UMI's 5.74% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMKT Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF | 0.46% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF | 5.74% | 6.23% | 4.39% | 4.67% | 4.36% | 3.00% | 2.18% | 2.47% | 2.48% | 0.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMKT and UMI have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EMKT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EMKT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.
UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.74%, compared with 0.46% for EMKT.
EMKT is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Lazard and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for EMKT and 0.85% for UMI.
Find the right allocation for EMKT and UMI
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