EMSF vs. MKOR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) and MKOR (Matthews Korea Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMSF is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Matthews, while MKOR is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Matthews. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMSF returned 63.33% vs 187.66% for MKOR. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

EMSF vs. MKOR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMSF achieves a 45.34% return, which is significantly lower than MKOR's 96.84% return.

EMSF

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: 8.61%
• YTD: 45.34%
• 6M: 40.08%
• 1Y: 63.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MKOR

• 1D: -0.99%
• 1M: 16.82%
• YTD: 96.84%
• 6M: 107.34%
• 1Y: 187.66%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMSF vs. MKOR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	45.34%	19.20%	-3.09%	1.88%
MKOR Matthews Korea Active ETF	96.84%	70.33%	-15.76%	7.97%

Correlation

The correlation between EMSF and MKOR is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2023	0.71

The correlation between EMSF and MKOR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMSF vs. MKOR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMSF	MKOR
Technology	43.6%	56.1%
Financial Services	16.6%	8.0%
Industrials	15.0%	15.0%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	7.0%
Healthcare	6.8%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	1.7%
Utilities	2.8%	0.6%
Communication Services	2.0%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	0.8%
Energy	-	0.6%

Return for Risk

EMSF vs. MKOR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 72
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 76

MKOR

MKOR Risk / Return Rank: 96
MKOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
MKOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
MKOR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
MKOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
MKOR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

EMSF vs. MKOR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) and Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR). 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.

	EMSF	MKOR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	5.08	-2.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.14	4.94	-1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.70	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	9.16	-4.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.61	35.31	-20.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMSF vs. MKOR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMSF Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is lower than the MKOR Sharpe Ratio of 5.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMSF and MKOR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMSF	MKOR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51	5.08	-2.57
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	1.57	-0.60

Drawdowns

EMSF vs. MKOR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMSF drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, which is greater than MKOR's maximum drawdown of -22.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMSF and MKOR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMSF	MKOR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.75%	-22.09%	-2.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.57%	-20.62%	+6.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-2.27%	+1.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.72%	-6.22%	+0.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.35%	5.34%	-0.99%

Volatility

EMSF vs. MKOR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) is 9.96%, while Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR) has a volatility of 17.87%. This indicates that EMSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MKOR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMSF	MKOR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.96%	17.87%	-7.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.98%	33.29%	-11.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.35%	37.15%	-11.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.75%	27.06%	-4.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.75%	27.06%	-4.31%

EMSF vs. MKOR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both EMSF and MKOR have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

EMSF vs. MKOR - Dividend Comparison

EMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than MKOR's 1.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.30%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%
MKOR Matthews Korea Active ETF	1.33%	2.62%	5.28%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMSF and MKOR in my portfolio?

EMSF and MKOR have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMSF or MKOR?

MKOR has higher volatility (17.87%) compared to EMSF (9.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMSF dropped -24.75% vs MKOR's -22.09%.

Which ETF is better, EMSF or MKOR?

On 1-year performance, MKOR leads with 187.66% vs 63.33% for EMSF. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, EMSF has been the lower-risk option at 9.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMSF or MKOR?

Over the 1-year period, MKOR has performed better with a 187.66% return vs 63.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMSF or MKOR?

EMSF and MKOR have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMSF or MKOR?

MKOR has the higher dividend yield at 1.33%, compared with 1.30% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between EMSF and MKOR?

EMSF is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while MKOR is Asia Pacific Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MKOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.08 vs 2.51), 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.