EMSF vs. MSTZ

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) and MSTZ (T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMSF is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Matthews, while MSTZ is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMSF returned 45.07% vs 282.56% for MSTZ. At a correlation of -0.38, they often move in opposite directions. EMSF charges 0.79%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for MSTZ.

Performance

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) 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, EMSF achieves a 36.62% return, which is significantly higher than MSTZ's -23.27% return.

EMSF

• 1D: -4.70%
• 1M: -5.78%
• 6M: 26.94%
• YTD: 36.62%
• 1Y: 45.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MSTZ

• 1D: 5.07%
• 1M: 46.38%
• 6M: -9.68%
• YTD: -23.27%
• 1Y: 282.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	36.62%	19.20%	-3.52%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	-23.27%	-38.95%	-94.43%

Correlation

The correlation between EMSF and MSTZ is -0.40, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024	-0.38

Return for Risk

EMSF vs. MSTZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 62
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 66

MSTZ

MSTZ Risk / Return Rank: 68
MSTZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
MSTZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
MSTZ Omega Ratio Rank: 68
MSTZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
MSTZ Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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. MSTZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	EMSF	MSTZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.55	1.92	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	2.45	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.32	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	3.35	-0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.46	6.53	+2.93

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is comparable to the MSTZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMSF 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

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMSF drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, smaller than the maximum MSTZ drawdown of -99.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMSF and MSTZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMSF	MSTZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.75%	-99.38%	+74.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.57%	-84.89%	+70.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.82%	-97.39%	+85.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.74%	-94.53%	+88.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.78%	43.51%	-38.73%

Volatility

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) is 13.86%, while T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF (MSTZ) has a volatility of 56.56%. This indicates that EMSF 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

	EMSF	MSTZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.86%	56.56%	-42.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.56%	135.11%	-109.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.18%	148.53%	-119.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.15%	171.02%	-146.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.15%	171.02%	-146.87%

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMSF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTZ's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMSF vs. MSTZ - Dividend Comparison

EMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, while MSTZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.38%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%
MSTZ T-REX 2X Inverse MSTR Daily Target ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMSF and MSTZ in my portfolio?

EMSF and MSTZ have a correlation of -0.40, 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 MSTZ?

MSTZ has higher volatility (56.56%) compared to EMSF (13.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMSF dropped -24.75% vs MSTZ's -99.38%.

Which ETF is better, EMSF or MSTZ?

On 1-year performance, MSTZ leads with 282.56% vs 45.07% for EMSF. On fees, EMSF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, EMSF has been the lower-risk option at 13.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMSF or MSTZ?

Over the 1-year period, MSTZ has performed better with a 282.56% return vs 45.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMSF or MSTZ?

EMSF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for MSTZ.

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

EMSF has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.00% for MSTZ.

What is the main difference between EMSF and MSTZ?

EMSF is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while MSTZ is Inverse Equities. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for EMSF and 1.05% for MSTZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MSTZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.55), 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.