EPEM vs. UEVM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EPEM (Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and UEVM (VictoryShares Emerging Markets Value Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EPEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Harbor, while UEVM is a Momentum fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory Emerging Market Value Momentum Index. EPEM is actively managed, while UEVM is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EPEM charges 0.84%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for UEVM.

Performance

EPEM vs. UEVM - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EPEM achieves a 28.50% return, which is significantly higher than UEVM's 8.82% return.

EPEM

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: 4.68%
• YTD: 28.50%
• 6M: 31.04%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UEVM

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: -0.49%
• YTD: 8.82%
• 6M: 7.88%
• 1Y: 23.89%
• 3Y*: 18.12%
• 5Y*: 7.52%
• 10Y*: —

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

EPEM vs. UEVM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	28.50%	20.76%
UEVM VictoryShares Emerging Markets Value Momentum ETF	8.82%	13.56%

Correlation

The correlation between EPEM and UEVM is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2025	0.84

EPEM vs. UEVM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EPEM	UEVM
Technology	39.4%	15.5%
Financial Services	22.7%	17.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	5.0%
Consumer Defensive	7.0%	5.5%
Basic Materials	6.5%	4.6%
Communication Services	6.0%	2.0%
Energy	3.6%	5.2%
Industrials	3.1%	8.7%
Healthcare	2.1%	4.4%
Real Estate	1.3%	2.8%
Utilities	-	4.1%

Return for Risk

EPEM vs. UEVM — Risk / Return Rank

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

UEVM

UEVM Risk / Return Rank: 47
UEVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
UEVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
UEVM Omega Ratio Rank: 46
UEVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
UEVM Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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. UEVM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EPEM) and VictoryShares Emerging Markets Value Momentum ETF (UEVM). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EPEM	UEVM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.58	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.47	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.88	0.33	+2.56

Drawdowns

EPEM vs. UEVM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EPEM drawdown since its inception was -13.27%, smaller than the maximum UEVM drawdown of -45.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EPEM and UEVM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EPEM	UEVM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.27%	-45.44%	+32.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-9.79%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.88%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.98%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.48%	-2.33%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.96%	-11.67%	+9.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.89%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	EPEM	UEVM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.03%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	12.13%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.36%	15.17%	+4.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.36%	15.90%	+3.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.36%	18.38%	+0.98%

EPEM vs. UEVM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EPEM has a 0.84% expense ratio, which is higher than UEVM's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

EPEM vs. UEVM - Dividend Comparison

EPEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, less than UEVM's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EPEM Harbor Emerging Markets Equity ETF	2.85%	3.66%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UEVM VictoryShares Emerging Markets Value Momentum ETF	3.06%	4.02%	5.65%	4.71%	3.46%	4.49%	2.19%	2.79%	2.34%	0.79%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EPEM and UEVM in my portfolio?

EPEM and UEVM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EPEM or UEVM?

On fees, UEVM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EPEM or UEVM?

UEVM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.84% for EPEM.

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

UEVM has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 2.85% for EPEM.

What is the main difference between EPEM and UEVM?

EPEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while UEVM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Victory Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.84% for EPEM and 0.45% for UEVM.