FDEM vs. EMXC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FDEM (Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - FDEM tracks the Fidelity Targeted Emerging Markets Factor Index while EMXC tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FDEM returned 8.86%/yr vs 12.43%/yr for EMXC. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FDEM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.

Performance

FDEM vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDEM achieves a 18.08% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 37.89% return.

FDEM

• 1D: -5.08%
• 1M: 1.30%
• YTD: 18.08%
• 6M: 19.00%
• 1Y: 36.64%
• 3Y*: 22.34%
• 5Y*: 8.86%
• 10Y*: —

EMXC

• 1D: -6.44%
• 1M: 4.83%
• YTD: 37.89%
• 6M: 39.80%
• 1Y: 67.97%
• 3Y*: 27.65%
• 5Y*: 12.43%
• 10Y*: —

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

FDEM vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FDEM Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF	18.08%	26.75%	9.34%	17.26%	-13.11%	-3.52%	8.87%	5.60%
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	37.89%	35.14%	2.68%	18.96%	-19.56%	8.54%	12.76%	7.54%

Correlation

The correlation between FDEM and EMXC is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2019	0.85

The correlation between FDEM and EMXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDEM vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDEM	EMXC
Technology	38.5%	52.4%
Financial Services	15.0%	17.4%
Consumer Cyclical	11.5%	4.1%
Communication Services	9.6%	3.0%
Energy	7.3%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.5%	2.4%
Real Estate	4.6%	0.8%
Industrials	4.4%	6.9%
Basic Materials	2.7%	6.0%
Healthcare	-	1.8%
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

FDEM vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDEM

FDEM Risk / Return Rank: 59
FDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
FDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
FDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 62
FDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
FDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 63

EMXC

EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 85
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 86
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FDEM	EMXC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	2.70	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.42	3.23	-0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.50	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.90	4.74	-1.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.86	18.14	-7.28

FDEM vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is lower than the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDEM and EMXC, 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

FDEM vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDEM drawdown since its inception was -33.65%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDEM and EMXC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDEM	EMXC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.65%	-42.81%	+9.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.70%	-14.41%	+1.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.04%	-19.12%	+3.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.47%	-28.91%	+0.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.09%	-6.44%	+1.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.80%	-10.15%	+1.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.38%	3.76%	-0.38%

Volatility

FDEM vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF (FDEM) is 11.27%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 14.74%. This indicates that FDEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDEM	EMXC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.27%	14.74%	-3.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.06%	23.44%	-5.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.86%	25.27%	-5.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.72%	18.40%	-1.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.23%	20.25%	-2.02%

FDEM vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDEM vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

FDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%, more than EMXC's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	1.93%	2.82%	2.69%	1.83%	2.85%	1.78%	1.45%	3.25%	2.63%	0.99%
FDEM Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF	2.96%	3.23%	4.05%	4.41%	3.95%	2.71%	1.84%	2.39%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDEM and EMXC in my portfolio?

FDEM and EMXC have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDEM or EMXC?

EMXC has higher volatility (14.74%) compared to FDEM (11.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDEM dropped -33.65% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

Which ETF is better, FDEM or EMXC?

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 12.43% vs 8.86% for FDEM. On fees, FDEM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FDEM has been the lower-risk option at 11.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDEM or EMXC?

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 12.43% return vs 8.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDEM or EMXC?

FDEM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EMXC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDEM or EMXC?

FDEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 1.93% for EMXC.

What is the main difference between FDEM and EMXC?

FDEM tracks Fidelity Targeted Emerging Markets Factor Index, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FDEM and 0.49% for EMXC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 1.85), 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.