EMOP vs. EMCS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EMOP (AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) and EMCS (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. EMOP is actively managed, while EMCS is passively managed. Over the past year, EMOP returned 56.25% vs 66.57% for EMCS. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMOP charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for EMCS.

Performance

EMOP vs. EMCS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMOP achieves a 33.60% return, which is significantly lower than EMCS's 38.43% return.

EMOP

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 6.99%
• YTD: 33.60%
• 6M: 35.45%
• 1Y: 56.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMCS

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 12.26%
• YTD: 38.43%
• 6M: 40.42%
• 1Y: 66.57%
• 3Y*: 29.17%
• 5Y*: 9.04%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMOP vs. EMCS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	33.60%	16.48%
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	38.43%	19.59%

Correlation

The correlation between EMOP and EMCS is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.93

The correlation between EMOP and EMCS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMOP vs. EMCS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMOP	EMCS
Technology	30.3%	50.7%
Financial Services	24.0%	26.0%
Communication Services	12.3%	7.4%
Industrials	8.1%	1.2%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	9.1%
Basic Materials	7.0%	2.6%
Utilities	2.8%	0.0%
Energy	2.6%	1.2%
Real Estate	2.3%	1.8%
Healthcare	1.6%	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.4%	0.0%

Return for Risk

EMOP vs. EMCS — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMOP

EMOP Risk / Return Rank: 83
EMOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
EMOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EMOP Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EMOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
EMOP Martin Ratio Rank: 83

EMCS

EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 85
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

EMOP vs. EMCS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). 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.

	EMOP	EMCS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.68	2.72	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	3.39	-0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.50	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.39	4.67	-0.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.44	17.33	-0.89

EMOP vs. EMCS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMOP Sharpe Ratio is 2.68, which is comparable to the EMCS Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMOP and EMCS, 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

EMOP vs. EMCS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMOP drawdown since its inception was -12.88%, smaller than the maximum EMCS drawdown of -44.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMOP and EMCS.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMOP	EMCS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.88%	-44.86%	+31.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.88%	-14.32%	+1.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.73%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-42.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.99%	-16.52%	+14.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.43%	3.85%	-0.42%

Volatility

EMOP vs. EMCS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP) is 9.44%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a volatility of 12.36%. This indicates that EMOP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMCS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMOP	EMCS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.44%	12.36%	-2.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.93%	22.11%	-3.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.12%	24.67%	-3.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.04%	21.16%	-0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.04%	21.93%	-0.89%

EMOP vs. EMCS - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMOP has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than EMCS's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMOP vs. EMCS - Dividend Comparison

EMOP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%, less than EMCS's 1.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	1.37%	1.66%	0.67%	3.07%	2.26%	1.46%	1.40%	3.56%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	0.81%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMOP and EMCS in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, EMOP and EMCS 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, EMOP or EMCS?

EMCS has higher volatility (12.36%) compared to EMOP (9.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMOP dropped -12.88% vs EMCS's -44.86%.

Which ETF is better, EMOP or EMCS?

On 1-year performance, EMCS leads with 66.57% vs 56.25% for EMOP. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EMOP has been the lower-risk option at 9.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMOP or EMCS?

Over the 1-year period, EMCS has performed better with a 66.57% return vs 56.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMOP or EMCS?

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for EMOP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMOP or EMCS?

EMCS has the higher dividend yield at 1.37%, compared with 0.81% for EMOP.

What is the main difference between EMOP and EMCS?

They also come from different issuers: AllianceBernstein and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for EMOP and 0.15% for EMCS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMCS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.68), 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.