PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMSF vs. EMDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMSF vs. EMDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMSF achieves a 30.73% return, which is significantly higher than EMDV's 1.51% return.


EMSF

1D
0.83%
1M
-8.36%
6M
17.49%
YTD
30.73%
1Y
42.52%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
15.92%

EMDV

1D
-0.18%
1M
4.30%
6M
0.72%
YTD
1.51%
1Y
6.10%
3Y*
1.66%
5Y*
-1.50%
10Y*
1.95%
ALL TIME*
4.01%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$3.04K$6.93K$10.37K
$80.02K$93.23K$184.42K

EMSF vs. EMDV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EMSF
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF
30.73%19.20%-3.09%0.98%
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
1.51%11.90%0.06%2.41%

Correlation

The correlation between EMSF and EMDV is 0.64, 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.

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023

0.70

The correlation between EMSF and EMDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMSF vs. EMDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMSF
EMDV

Technology

52.8%
22.8%

Financial Services

15.0%
24.0%

Industrials

11.0%
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
6.7%

Healthcare

6.0%
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
14.4%

Utilities

2.1%
8.8%

Communication Services

1.7%
5.8%

Real Estate

1.6%

-

Basic Materials

-

2.5%

Energy

-

-

Technology

EMSF
52.8%
EMDV
22.8%

Financial Services

EMSF
15.0%
EMDV
24.0%

Industrials

EMSF
11.0%
EMDV
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

EMSF
6.3%
EMDV
6.7%

Healthcare

EMSF
6.0%
EMDV
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

EMSF
3.6%
EMDV
14.4%

Utilities

EMSF
2.1%
EMDV
8.8%

Communication Services

EMSF
1.7%
EMDV
5.8%

Real Estate

EMSF
1.6%
EMDV

-

Basic Materials

EMSF

-

EMDV
2.5%

Energy

EMSF

-

EMDV

-

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

EMSF vs. EMDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMSF
EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank

EMDV
EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
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.

EMSF vs. EMDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). 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.


EMSFEMDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.10

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.10

0.81

+1.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.05

1.92

+5.13

EMSF vs. EMDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is higher than the EMDV Sharpe Ratio of 0.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMSF and EMDV, 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

EMSF vs. EMDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMSF drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, smaller than the maximum EMDV drawdown of -39.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMSF and EMDV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMSFEMDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.75%

-39.20%

+14.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.49%

-7.24%

-12.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.71%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.62%

-14.51%

-1.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.91%

-13.59%

+7.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.80%

3.04%

+2.76%

Volatility

EMSF vs. EMDV - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a higher volatility of 10.79% compared to ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) at 3.09%. This indicates that EMSF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMSFEMDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.79%

3.09%

+7.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.54%

9.93%

+16.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

30.10%

11.68%

+18.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.40%

15.41%

+8.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.40%

17.99%

+6.41%

EMSF vs. EMDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMSF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than EMDV's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMSF vs. EMDV - Dividend Comparison

EMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, less than EMDV's 1.90% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
1.90%2.46%2.79%1.88%3.68%2.12%3.12%2.38%1.27%2.09%2.87%
EMSF
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF
1.44%1.88%3.29%0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMSF and EMDV have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMSF has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to EMDV (3.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMSF dropped -24.75% vs EMDV's -39.20%.

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 42.52% vs 6.10% for EMDV. On fees, EMDV is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, EMDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 42.52% return vs 6.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMDV is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

EMDV has the higher dividend yield at 1.90%, compared with 1.44% for EMSF.

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for EMSF and 0.60% for EMDV.

EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 0.50), 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 EMSF and EMDV

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