PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMM vs. BOTZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMM vs. BOTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic ETF (BOTZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMM achieves a 21.70% return, which is significantly higher than BOTZ's -0.78% return.


EMM

1D
1.09%
1M
-4.48%
6M
12.18%
YTD
21.70%
1Y
40.77%
3Y*
17.56%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
17.27%

BOTZ

1D
2.02%
1M
-3.90%
6M
-2.50%
YTD
-0.78%
1Y
9.01%
3Y*
9.60%
5Y*
1.12%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
9.87%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$29.33M$29.66M$37.04M
$209.26K$283.91K$450.77K

EMM vs. BOTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EMM
Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF
21.70%30.21%2.34%2.99%
BOTZ
Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic ETF
-0.78%14.17%12.26%12.61%

Correlation

The correlation between EMM and BOTZ is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2023

0.71

The correlation between EMM and BOTZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMM vs. BOTZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMM
BOTZ

Technology

48.1%
30.8%

Financial Services

20.9%
0.9%

Industrials

9.9%
50.8%

Energy

4.5%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

4.3%
0.0%

Basic Materials

3.8%
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

2.6%
6.2%

Communication Services

1.7%
4.2%

Real Estate

1.6%

-

Healthcare

1.4%
8.0%

Utilities

1.2%
0.0%

Technology

EMM
48.1%
BOTZ
30.8%

Financial Services

EMM
20.9%
BOTZ
0.9%

Industrials

EMM
9.9%
BOTZ
50.8%

Energy

EMM
4.5%
BOTZ
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

EMM
4.3%
BOTZ
0.0%

Basic Materials

EMM
3.8%
BOTZ
0.0%

Consumer Cyclical

EMM
2.6%
BOTZ
6.2%

Communication Services

EMM
1.7%
BOTZ
4.2%

Real Estate

EMM
1.6%
BOTZ

-

Healthcare

EMM
1.4%
BOTZ
8.0%

Utilities

EMM
1.2%
BOTZ
0.0%

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

EMM vs. BOTZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EMM
EMM Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

BOTZ
BOTZ Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
BOTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BOTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
BOTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
BOTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
BOTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EMM vs. BOTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic ETF (BOTZ). 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.


EMMBOTZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.08

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.33

0.47

+1.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.08

1.18

+6.90

EMM vs. BOTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is higher than the BOTZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMM and BOTZ, 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...

Drawdowns

EMM vs. BOTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMM drawdown since its inception was -21.99%, smaller than the maximum BOTZ drawdown of -55.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMM and BOTZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMMBOTZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.99%

-55.54%

+33.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.62%

-19.34%

+1.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.99%

-29.02%

+7.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-55.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.92%

-13.65%

+1.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.85%

-18.22%

+13.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.06%

7.64%

-2.58%

Volatility

EMM vs. BOTZ - Volatility Comparison

Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a higher volatility of 10.62% compared to Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic ETF (BOTZ) at 9.24%. This indicates that EMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BOTZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMMBOTZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.62%

9.24%

+1.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.66%

21.66%

+3.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.71%

26.47%

+0.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.47%

27.29%

-6.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.47%

25.89%

-5.42%

EMM vs. BOTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMM has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BOTZ's 0.68% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMM vs. BOTZ - Dividend Comparison

EMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, more than BOTZ's 0.49% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
BOTZ
Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence Thematic ETF
0.49%0.66%0.13%0.20%0.23%0.16%0.19%0.83%1.44%0.01%0.06%
EMM
Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF
0.78%0.90%0.80%0.66%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMM and BOTZ have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMM has higher volatility (10.62%) compared to BOTZ (9.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMM dropped -21.99% vs BOTZ's -55.54%.

On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 17.56% vs 9.60% for BOTZ. On fees, BOTZ is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, BOTZ has been the lower-risk option at 9.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, EMM has performed better with a 17.56% return vs 9.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BOTZ is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMM.

EMM has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.49% for BOTZ.

EMM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while BOTZ is Artificial Intelligence. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMM and 0.68% for BOTZ.

EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs 0.34), 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 EMM and BOTZ

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