EMM vs. EMDM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) and EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. EMM is actively managed, while EMDM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMM returned 21.97%/yr vs 30.82%/yr for EMDM. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

EMM vs. EMDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMM achieves a 30.43% return, which is significantly lower than EMDM's 35.53% return.

EMM

• 1D: -5.60%
• 1M: 4.22%
• YTD: 30.43%
• 6M: 33.87%
• 1Y: 55.00%
• 3Y*: 21.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMDM

• 1D: -5.54%
• 1M: 3.57%
• YTD: 35.53%
• 6M: 38.16%
• 1Y: 81.79%
• 3Y*: 30.82%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMM vs. EMDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	30.43%	30.21%	2.34%	2.99%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	35.53%	59.68%	-4.93%	14.69%

Correlation

The correlation between EMM and EMDM is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2023	0.88

The correlation between EMM and EMDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMM vs. EMDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 76
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

EMDM

EMDM Risk / Return Rank: 90
EMDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
EMDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
EMDM Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
EMDM Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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. EMDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). 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.

	EMM	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.26	3.15	-0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.87	3.65	-0.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.54	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.75	5.25	-1.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.03	20.82	-5.80

EMM vs. EMDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMM Sharpe Ratio is 2.26, which is comparable to the EMDM Sharpe Ratio of 3.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMM and EMDM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMM vs. EMDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMM drawdown since its inception was -21.99%, which is greater than EMDM's maximum drawdown of -18.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMM and EMDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMM	EMDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.99%	-18.81%	-3.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.75%	-15.65%	+0.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.99%	-18.81%	-3.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.60%	-5.54%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.67%	-4.06%	-0.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.67%	3.94%	-0.27%

Volatility

EMM vs. EMDM - Volatility Comparison

Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) have volatilities of 13.10% and 13.23%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMM	EMDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.10%	13.23%	-0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.46%	23.83%	-1.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.51%	26.11%	-1.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.83%	20.67%	-0.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.83%	20.67%	-0.84%

EMM vs. EMDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both EMM and EMDM have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

EMM vs. EMDM - Dividend Comparison

EMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%, less than EMDM's 2.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.63%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.69%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMM and EMDM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, EMM and EMDM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EMM or EMDM?

EMDM has higher volatility (13.23%) compared to EMM (13.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMM dropped -21.99% vs EMDM's -18.81%.

Which ETF is better, EMM or EMDM?

On 3-year performance, EMDM leads with 30.82% vs 21.97% for EMM. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, EMM has been the lower-risk option at 13.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMM or EMDM?

Over the 3-year period, EMDM has performed better with a 30.82% return vs 21.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMM or EMDM?

EMM and EMDM have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMM or EMDM?

EMDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 0.69% for EMM.

What is the main difference between EMM and EMDM?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.15 vs 2.25), 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.