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

Performance

FDEM vs. EMGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) and iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF). 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 24.40% return, which is significantly lower than EMGF's 32.97% return.


FDEM

1D
0.51%
1M
6.72%
YTD
24.40%
6M
25.99%
1Y
45.23%
3Y*
24.48%
5Y*
10.15%
10Y*

EMGF

1D
0.55%
1M
8.68%
YTD
32.97%
6M
34.74%
1Y
55.99%
3Y*
27.87%
5Y*
11.39%
10Y*
11.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FDEM vs. EMGF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FDEM
Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF
24.40%26.75%9.34%17.26%-13.11%-3.52%8.87%5.60%
EMGF
iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF
32.97%31.41%9.06%10.86%-16.55%6.65%10.27%8.40%

Correlation

The correlation between FDEM and EMGF is 0.93, 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

0.93

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

0.90

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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2019

0.90

The correlation between FDEM and EMGF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDEM vs. EMGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FDEM
EMGF

Technology

38.5%
41.4%

Financial Services

15.0%
17.4%

Consumer Cyclical

11.5%
9.6%

Communication Services

9.6%
6.5%

Energy

7.3%
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

6.5%
3.4%

Real Estate

4.6%
1.0%

Industrials

4.4%
7.2%

Basic Materials

2.7%
5.3%

Healthcare

-

2.4%

Utilities

-

2.3%

Technology

FDEM
38.5%
EMGF
41.4%

Financial Services

FDEM
15.0%
EMGF
17.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FDEM
11.5%
EMGF
9.6%

Communication Services

FDEM
9.6%
EMGF
6.5%

Energy

FDEM
7.3%
EMGF
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

FDEM
6.5%
EMGF
3.4%

Real Estate

FDEM
4.6%
EMGF
1.0%

Industrials

FDEM
4.4%
EMGF
7.2%

Basic Materials

FDEM
2.7%
EMGF
5.3%

Healthcare

FDEM

-

EMGF
2.4%

Utilities

FDEM

-

EMGF
2.3%

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. EMGF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDEM
FDEM Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
FDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
FDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

EMGF
EMGF Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
EMGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMGF Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
EMGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMGF Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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. EMGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) and iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF). 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.


FDEMEMGFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.48

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.58

4.16

-0.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.46

15.36

-1.90

FDEM vs. EMGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is comparable to the EMGF Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDEM and EMGF, 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...

Drawdowns

FDEM vs. EMGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDEM drawdown since its inception was -33.65%, smaller than the maximum EMGF drawdown of -40.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDEM and EMGF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FDEMEMGFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.65%

-40.23%

+6.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.70%

-13.54%

+0.84%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.04%

-17.65%

+1.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.47%

-28.20%

-0.27%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.01%

0.00%

-0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.80%

-10.02%

+1.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.37%

3.66%

-0.29%

Volatility

FDEM vs. EMGF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) is 9.83%, while iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) has a volatility of 11.17%. This indicates that FDEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FDEMEMGFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.83%

11.17%

-1.34%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.25%

19.89%

-2.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.19%

22.01%

-2.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.57%

18.18%

-1.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.13%

19.63%

-1.50%

FDEM vs. EMGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FDEM and EMGF have an expense ratio of 0.45%.


Dividends

FDEM vs. EMGF - Dividend Comparison

FDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%, more than EMGF's 1.89% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EMGF
iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF
1.89%2.52%3.42%5.94%4.04%2.48%1.95%2.63%2.73%1.94%2.04%
FDEM
Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF
2.81%3.23%4.05%4.41%3.95%2.71%1.84%2.39%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, FDEM and EMGF 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.

EMGF has higher volatility (11.17%) compared to FDEM (9.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDEM dropped -33.65% vs EMGF's -40.23%.

On 5-year performance, EMGF leads with 11.39% vs 10.15% for FDEM. Both ETFs have the same 0.45% expense ratio. On volatility, FDEM has been the lower-risk option at 9.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMGF has performed better with a 11.39% return vs 10.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDEM and EMGF have the same expense ratio: 0.45% per year.

FDEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.81%, compared with 1.89% for EMGF.

FDEM tracks Fidelity Targeted Emerging Markets Factor Index, while EMGF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares.

EMGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 2.37), 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 EMGF

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