EMM vs. DFSE

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE).

EMM and DFSE are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. EMM is an actively managed fund by Global X. It was launched on Sep 24, 2010. DFSE is an actively managed fund by Dimensional. It was launched on Nov 1, 2022.

Performance

EMM vs. DFSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

EMM vs. DFSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	4.64%	30.21%	2.34%	3.40%
DFSE Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF	3.13%	28.22%	6.90%	8.88%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMM achieves a 4.64% return, which is significantly higher than DFSE's 3.13% return.

EMM

• 1D: 1.29%
• 1M: -8.16%
• YTD: 4.64%
• 6M: 13.44%
• 1Y: 42.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DFSE

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: -6.31%
• YTD: 3.13%
• 6M: 4.22%
• 1Y: 29.11%
• 3Y*: 15.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMM vs. DFSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMM has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than DFSE's 0.41% expense ratio.

EMM

Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF

DFSE

Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF

Return for Risk

EMM vs. DFSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 90
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 90

DFSE

DFSE Risk / Return Rank: 77
DFSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
DFSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
DFSE Omega Ratio Rank: 76
DFSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
DFSE Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

EMM vs. DFSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE). 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.

	EMM	DFSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	1.52	+0.63
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	2.09	+0.68
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.30	+0.09
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.92	2.32	+0.60
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.66	8.59	+4.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMM vs. DFSE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMM Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is higher than the DFSE Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMM and DFSE, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMM	DFSE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.15	1.52	+0.63
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	1.12	-0.35

Correlation

The correlation between EMM and DFSE is 0.84, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

EMM vs. DFSE - Dividend Comparison

EMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.86%, less than DFSE's 2.16% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.86%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%	0.00%
DFSE Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF	2.16%	2.26%	2.06%	2.06%	0.36%

Drawdowns

EMM vs. DFSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMM drawdown since its inception was -21.99%, which is greater than DFSE's maximum drawdown of -19.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMM and DFSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMM	DFSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.99%	-19.77%	-2.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.75%	-12.88%	-1.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.25%	-9.28%	-0.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.83%	-4.08%	-0.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.40%	3.47%	-0.07%

Volatility

EMM vs. DFSE - Volatility Comparison

Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a higher volatility of 9.84% compared to Dimensional Emerging Markets Sustainability Core 1 ETF (DFSE) at 8.84%. This indicates that EMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMM	DFSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.84%	8.84%	+1.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.79%	13.93%	+1.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.64%	19.20%	+0.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.69%	17.09%	+0.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.69%	17.09%	+0.60%