EUM vs. NOBL

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EUM (ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets) and NOBL (ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EUM is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (-100%), while NOBL is a Dividend fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EUM returned -9.08%/yr vs 9.76%/yr for NOBL. At a correlation of -0.54, they often move in opposite directions. EUM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for NOBL.

Performance

EUM vs. NOBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets (EUM) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EUM achieves a -16.78% return, which is significantly lower than NOBL's 11.29% return. Over the past 10 years, EUM has underperformed NOBL with an annualized return of -9.08%, while NOBL has yielded a comparatively higher 9.76% annualized return.

EUM

• 1D: 2.11%
• 1M: 6.40%
• 6M: -11.71%
• YTD: -16.78%
• 1Y: -25.07%
• 3Y*: -13.17%
• 5Y*: -4.72%
• 10Y*: -9.08%

NOBL

• 1D: 2.38%
• 1M: 3.24%
• 6M: 5.51%
• YTD: 11.29%
• 1Y: 14.89%
• 3Y*: 8.85%
• 5Y*: 6.91%
• 10Y*: 9.76%

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

EUM vs. NOBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EUM ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets	-16.78%	-22.61%	-0.83%	-3.89%	21.11%	-1.32%	-24.37%	-15.27%	14.60%	-28.08%
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	11.29%	6.84%	6.72%	8.09%	-6.52%	25.46%	8.35%	27.39%	-3.26%	21.02%

Correlation

The correlation between EUM and NOBL is -0.18, 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	-0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.42
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2013	-0.54

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between EUM and NOBL has weakened: their correlation has moved from -0.54 to -0.18, meaning they move in opposite directions less often than they have historically.

EUM vs. NOBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EUM	NOBL
Financial Services	31.5%	12.8%
Basic Materials	-	10.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	5.3%
Consumer Defensive	-	23.6%
Energy	-	2.9%
Healthcare	-	10.2%
Industrials	-	20.2%
Real Estate	-	4.6%
Technology	-	4.6%
Utilities	-	5.7%

Return for Risk

EUM vs. NOBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

EUM

EUM Risk / Return Rank: 2
EUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
EUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
EUM Omega Ratio Rank: 2
EUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
EUM Martin Ratio Rank: 2

NOBL

NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 40
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 39
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

EUM vs. NOBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets (EUM) and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL). 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.

	EUM	NOBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.04	1.27	-2.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.52	1.95	-3.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.22	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.76	1.64	-2.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.41	4.15	-5.56

EUM vs. NOBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EUM Sharpe Ratio is -1.04, which is lower than the NOBL Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EUM and NOBL, 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

EUM vs. NOBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EUM drawdown since its inception was -93.19%, which is greater than NOBL's maximum drawdown of -35.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EUM and NOBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	EUM	NOBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.19%	-35.43%	-57.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-33.23%	-9.11%	-24.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-47.97%	-15.36%	-32.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-50.87%	-17.92%	-32.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.12%	-35.43%	-30.69%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-92.49%	-0.69%	-91.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-77.24%	-3.47%	-73.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.85%	3.60%	+14.25%

Volatility

EUM vs. NOBL - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets (EUM) has a higher volatility of 9.82% compared to ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) at 4.72%. This indicates that EUM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EUM	NOBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.82%	4.72%	+5.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.92%	8.85%	+13.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.11%	11.82%	+12.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.96%	14.47%	+5.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.75%	16.61%	+4.14%

EUM vs. NOBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

EUM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than NOBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EUM vs. NOBL - Dividend Comparison

EUM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.06%, more than NOBL's 2.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EUM ProShares Short MSCI Emerging Markets	4.06%	3.98%	4.22%	3.86%	0.82%	0.00%	0.15%	1.35%	0.88%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF	2.03%	2.14%	2.05%	2.09%	1.94%	1.89%	2.14%	1.89%	2.37%	1.74%	2.13%	2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EUM and NOBL in my portfolio?

EUM and NOBL have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EUM or NOBL?

EUM has higher volatility (9.82%) compared to NOBL (4.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EUM dropped -93.19% vs NOBL's -35.43%.

Which ETF is better, EUM or NOBL?

On 10-year performance, NOBL leads with 9.76% vs -9.08% for EUM. On fees, NOBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 4.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EUM or NOBL?

Over the 10-year period, NOBL has performed better with a 9.76% return vs -9.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EUM or NOBL?

NOBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for EUM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EUM or NOBL?

EUM has the higher dividend yield at 4.06%, compared with 2.03% for NOBL.

What is the main difference between EUM and NOBL?

EUM is categorized as Inverse Equities, while NOBL is Dividend. EUM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (-100%), while NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for EUM and 0.35% for NOBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NOBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs -1.04), 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.