EPEM vs. HAPS

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

EPEM (Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and HAPS (Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EPEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Harbor, while HAPS is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Human Capital Factor Small Cap Index - Benchmark TR Gross. EPEM is actively managed, while HAPS is passively managed. Over the past year, EPEM returned 44.02% vs 30.58% for HAPS. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EPEM charges 0.84%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for HAPS.

Performance

EPEM vs. HAPS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) and Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EPEM achieves a 23.73% return, which is significantly higher than HAPS's 15.94% return.

EPEM

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 0.78%
• YTD: 23.73%
• 6M: 25.59%
• 1Y: 44.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HAPS

• 1D: 1.03%
• 1M: 5.44%
• YTD: 15.94%
• 6M: 13.47%
• 1Y: 30.58%
• 3Y*: 13.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EPEM vs. HAPS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	23.73%	20.73%
HAPS Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF	15.94%	14.87%

Correlation

The correlation between EPEM and HAPS is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2025	0.52

The correlation between EPEM and HAPS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

EPEM vs. HAPS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EPEM	HAPS
Technology	42.1%	16.8%
Financial Services	22.1%	17.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	2.7%
Basic Materials	6.0%	5.7%
Communication Services	5.6%	2.7%
Energy	3.2%	7.2%
Industrials	2.5%	14.7%
Healthcare	1.8%	16.1%
Real Estate	1.2%	5.9%
Utilities	-	2.5%

Return for Risk

EPEM vs. HAPS — Risk / Return Rank

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

EPEM

EPEM Risk / Return Rank: 74
EPEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
EPEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
EPEM Omega Ratio Rank: 76
EPEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
EPEM Martin Ratio Rank: 74

HAPS

HAPS Risk / Return Rank: 64
HAPS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
HAPS Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
HAPS Omega Ratio Rank: 55
HAPS Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
HAPS Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

EPEM vs. HAPS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) and Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS). 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	HAPS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	1.80	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.67	2.65	+0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.30	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.33	3.07	+0.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.97	10.39	+1.58

EPEM vs. HAPS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EPEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the HAPS Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EPEM and HAPS, 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. HAPS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EPEM drawdown since its inception was -13.27%, smaller than the maximum HAPS drawdown of -27.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EPEM and HAPS.

Drawdown Indicators

	EPEM	HAPS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.27%	-27.44%	+14.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.27%	-10.01%	-3.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.44%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.10%	0.00%	-6.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.09%	-6.03%	+3.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.69%	2.95%	+0.74%

Volatility

EPEM vs. HAPS - Volatility Comparison

Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) has a higher volatility of 10.68% compared to Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF (HAPS) at 4.05%. This indicates that EPEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HAPS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EPEM	HAPS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.68%	4.05%	+6.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.89%	11.96%	+6.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.19%	17.10%	+4.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.88%	20.74%	+0.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.88%	20.74%	+0.14%

EPEM vs. HAPS - Expense Ratio Comparison

EPEM has a 0.84% expense ratio, which is higher than HAPS's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

EPEM vs. HAPS - Dividend Comparison

EPEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%, more than HAPS's 0.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	2.96%	3.66%	0.00%	0.00%
HAPS Harbor Human Capital Factor US Small Cap ETF	0.49%	0.57%	0.72%	0.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EPEM and HAPS in my portfolio?

EPEM and HAPS have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EPEM or HAPS?

EPEM has higher volatility (10.68%) compared to HAPS (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EPEM dropped -13.27% vs HAPS's -27.44%.

Which ETF is better, EPEM or HAPS?

On 1-year performance, EPEM leads with 44.02% vs 30.58% for HAPS. On fees, HAPS is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, HAPS has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EPEM or HAPS?

Over the 1-year period, EPEM has performed better with a 44.02% return vs 30.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EPEM or HAPS?

HAPS is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.84% for EPEM.

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

EPEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 0.49% for HAPS.

What is the main difference between EPEM and HAPS?

EPEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while HAPS is Small Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.84% for EPEM and 0.60% for HAPS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EPEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs 1.80), 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.