EPEM vs. BKEM

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

EPEM (Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. EPEM is actively managed, while BKEM is passively managed. Over the past year, EPEM returned 44.76% vs 37.39% for BKEM. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. EPEM charges 0.84%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.

Performance

EPEM vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EPEM achieves a 26.55% return, which is significantly higher than BKEM's 22.42% return.

EPEM

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: -0.13%
• 6M: 14.85%
• YTD: 26.55%
• 1Y: 44.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 43.82%

BKEM

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -2.58%
• 6M: 13.29%
• YTD: 22.42%
• 1Y: 37.39%
• 3Y*: 20.07%
• 5Y*: 7.66%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.93%

*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)
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$482.63K	$311.92K	$245.54K
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$3.43K	$12.08K	$5.33K

EPEM vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	26.55%	20.73%
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	22.42%	19.01%

Correlation

The correlation between EPEM and BKEM is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025	0.91

The correlation between EPEM and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

EPEM vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EPEM	BKEM
Technology	42.3%	44.5%
Financial Services	23.9%	17.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	7.7%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	2.6%
Basic Materials	5.4%	5.4%
Communication Services	5.3%	5.8%
Energy	3.1%	3.1%
Industrials	2.7%	7.6%
Healthcare	1.7%	2.7%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.1%
Utilities	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

EPEM vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EPEM

EPEM Risk / Return Rank: 76
EPEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
EPEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
EPEM Omega Ratio Rank: 77
EPEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
EPEM Martin Ratio Rank: 75

BKEM

BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 59
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 57
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

EPEM vs. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). 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.

	EPEM	BKEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	1.57	+0.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	2.10	+0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.29	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.39	2.70	+0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.63	8.19	+2.44

EPEM vs. BKEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EPEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the BKEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EPEM and BKEM, 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

EPEM vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EPEM drawdown since its inception was -13.27%, smaller than the maximum BKEM drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EPEM and BKEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EPEM	BKEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.27%	-39.48%	+26.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.27%	-13.91%	+0.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.28%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.96%	-7.30%	+3.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.49%	-15.74%	+13.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.22%	4.58%	-0.36%

Volatility

EPEM vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) is 6.57%, while BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) has a volatility of 8.56%. This indicates that EPEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BKEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EPEM	BKEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.57%	8.56%	-1.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.79%	21.91%	-2.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.35%	23.93%	-1.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.16%	19.64%	+1.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.16%	19.76%	+1.40%

EPEM vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EPEM has a 0.84% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.

Dividends

EPEM vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison

EPEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, more than BKEM's 1.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.91%	2.25%	2.76%	3.02%	3.15%	2.22%	1.78%
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	2.90%	3.66%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EPEM and BKEM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, EPEM and BKEM 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, EPEM or BKEM?

BKEM has higher volatility (8.56%) compared to EPEM (6.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EPEM dropped -13.27% vs BKEM's -39.48%.

Which ETF is better, EPEM or BKEM?

On 1-year performance, EPEM leads with 44.76% vs 37.39% for BKEM. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, EPEM has been the lower-risk option at 6.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EPEM or BKEM?

Over the 1-year period, EPEM has performed better with a 44.76% return vs 37.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EPEM or BKEM?

BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.84% for EPEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EPEM or BKEM?

EPEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.90%, compared with 1.91% for BKEM.

What is the main difference between EPEM and BKEM?

They also come from different issuers: Harbor and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.84% for EPEM and 0.11% for BKEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EPEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs 1.57), 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.