EMM vs. MSTZ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) and MSTZ (T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund actively managed by Global X, while MSTZ is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMM returned 39.26% vs 159.07% for MSTZ. Their -0.37 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. EMM charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for MSTZ.

Performance

EMM vs. MSTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMM achieves a 20.39% return, which is significantly higher than MSTZ's -30.44% return.

EMM

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: -5.50%
• 6M: 12.37%
• YTD: 20.39%
• 1Y: 39.26%
• 3Y*: 16.45%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.93%

MSTZ

• 1D: 8.95%
• 1M: 7.38%
• 6M: -24.16%
• YTD: -30.44%
• 1Y: 159.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -86.57%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	$252.31K	$295.99K	$449.48K
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	$101.73M	$133.33M	$177.41M

EMM vs. MSTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	20.39%	30.21%	-4.32%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	-30.44%	-38.95%	-94.43%

Correlation

The correlation between EMM and MSTZ is -0.38, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024	-0.37

Return for Risk

EMM vs. MSTZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 62
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 64
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 63

MSTZ

MSTZ Risk / Return Rank: 61
MSTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
MSTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
MSTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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. MSTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ). 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	MSTZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.38	+0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.99	2.22	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.28	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.19	2.44	-0.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.68	4.53	+3.15

EMM vs. MSTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the MSTZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMM and MSTZ, 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. MSTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMM drawdown since its inception was -21.99%, smaller than the maximum MSTZ drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMM and MSTZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMM	MSTZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.99%	-99.38%	+77.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.62%	-84.89%	+67.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.87%	-97.63%	+84.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.84%	-94.63%	+89.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.00%	45.62%	-40.62%

Volatility

EMM vs. MSTZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) is 10.56%, while T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ) has a volatility of 37.86%. This indicates that EMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMM	MSTZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.56%	37.86%	-27.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.68%	134.52%	-109.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.65%	150.23%	-123.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.48%	169.87%	-149.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.48%	169.87%	-149.39%

EMM vs. MSTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMM has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTZ's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMM vs. MSTZ - Dividend Comparison

EMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.79%, while MSTZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.79%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMM and MSTZ in my portfolio?

EMM and MSTZ have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMM or MSTZ?

MSTZ has higher volatility (37.86%) compared to EMM (10.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMM dropped -21.99% vs MSTZ's -99.38%.

Which ETF is better, EMM or MSTZ?

On 1-year performance, MSTZ leads with 159.07% vs 39.26% for EMM. On fees, EMM is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, EMM has been the lower-risk option at 10.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMM or MSTZ?

Over the 1-year period, MSTZ has performed better with a 159.07% return vs 39.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMM or MSTZ?

EMM is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for MSTZ.

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

EMM has the higher dividend yield at 0.79%, compared with 0.00% for MSTZ.

What is the main difference between EMM and MSTZ?

EMM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while MSTZ is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMM and 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 1.38), 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.