PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FDEM vs. DBEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FDEM vs. DBEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDEM achieves a 22.58% return, which is significantly lower than DBEM's 32.18% return.


FDEM

1D
-1.46%
1M
7.69%
YTD
22.58%
6M
24.26%
1Y
45.52%
3Y*
23.79%
5Y*
9.43%
10Y*

DBEM

1D
-0.69%
1M
10.58%
YTD
32.18%
6M
34.98%
1Y
64.04%
3Y*
25.82%
5Y*
9.74%
10Y*
10.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FDEM vs. DBEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FDEM
Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF
22.58%26.75%9.34%17.26%-13.11%-3.52%8.87%5.73%
DBEM
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF
32.18%30.42%10.61%10.53%-17.00%-2.26%18.12%8.70%

Correlation

The correlation between FDEM and DBEM is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2019

0.86

The correlation between FDEM and DBEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDEM vs. DBEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FDEM
DBEM

Technology

31.8%
36.4%

Financial Services

16.3%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
9.6%

Communication Services

10.6%
7.0%

Energy

8.3%
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

7.6%
3.0%

Real Estate

5.2%
1.1%

Industrials

4.8%
7.6%

Basic Materials

3.2%
6.6%

Healthcare

-

2.9%

Utilities

-

2.1%

Technology

FDEM
31.8%
DBEM
36.4%

Financial Services

FDEM
16.3%
DBEM
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FDEM
12.2%
DBEM
9.6%

Communication Services

FDEM
10.6%
DBEM
7.0%

Energy

FDEM
8.3%
DBEM
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

FDEM
7.6%
DBEM
3.0%

Real Estate

FDEM
5.2%
DBEM
1.1%

Industrials

FDEM
4.8%
DBEM
7.6%

Basic Materials

FDEM
3.2%
DBEM
6.6%

Healthcare

FDEM

-

DBEM
2.9%

Utilities

FDEM

-

DBEM
2.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FDEM vs. DBEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDEM
FDEM Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
FDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
FDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

DBEM
DBEM Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
DBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
DBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FDEM vs. DBEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM). 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.


FDEMDBEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.64

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

6.13

-2.52

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.12

24.38

-10.26

FDEM vs. DBEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the DBEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDEM and DBEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FDEMDBEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.63

3.58

-0.95

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

0.57

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.53

0.34

+0.19

Drawdowns

FDEM vs. DBEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDEM drawdown since its inception was -33.65%, roughly equal to the maximum DBEM drawdown of -33.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDEM and DBEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FDEMDBEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.65%

-33.51%

-0.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.70%

-10.51%

-2.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.04%

-15.12%

-0.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.02%

-30.48%

+1.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.46%

-0.69%

-0.77%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.84%

-11.69%

+2.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.23%

2.63%

+0.60%

Volatility

FDEM vs. DBEM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) have volatilities of 7.26% and 7.53%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FDEMDBEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.26%

7.53%

-0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.03%

15.53%

-0.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.36%

17.96%

-0.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.13%

17.08%

-0.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.91%

17.14%

+0.77%

FDEM vs. DBEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than DBEM's 0.66% expense ratio.


Dividends

FDEM vs. DBEM - Dividend Comparison

FDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, more than DBEM's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBEM
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF
1.39%1.84%2.48%2.55%2.65%1.77%1.74%2.59%2.85%1.51%1.59%3.49%
FDEM
Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF
2.66%3.23%4.05%4.41%3.95%2.71%1.84%2.39%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FDEM and DBEM have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DBEM has higher volatility (7.53%) compared to FDEM (7.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDEM dropped -33.65% vs DBEM's -33.51%.

On 5-year performance, DBEM leads with 9.74% vs 9.43% for FDEM. On fees, FDEM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FDEM has been the lower-risk option at 7.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, DBEM has performed better with a 9.74% return vs 9.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDEM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DBEM.

FDEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.66%, compared with 1.39% for DBEM.

FDEM tracks Fidelity Targeted Emerging Markets Factor Index, while DBEM tracks MSCI EM US Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FDEM and 0.66% for DBEM.

DBEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.58 vs 2.63), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FDEM and DBEM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer