FEM vs. EMOP

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FEM (First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund) and EMOP (AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. FEM is passively managed, while EMOP is actively managed. Over the past year, FEM returned 28.96% vs 39.27% for EMOP. Their 0.80 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FEM charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for EMOP.

Performance

FEM vs. EMOP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEM achieves a 14.62% return, which is significantly lower than EMOP's 21.72% return.

FEM

• 1D: 1.10%
• 1M: -0.97%
• 6M: 7.32%
• YTD: 14.62%
• 1Y: 28.96%
• 3Y*: 15.72%
• 5Y*: 6.98%
• 10Y*: 8.01%
• ALL TIME*: 3.68%

EMOP

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: -2.67%
• 6M: 10.59%
• YTD: 21.72%
• 1Y: 39.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 36.37%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	$2.52M	$2.67M	$4.92M
FEM First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund	$3.69M	$3.65M	$3.68M

FEM vs. EMOP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FEM First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund	14.62%	15.88%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	21.72%	16.48%

Correlation

The correlation between FEM and EMOP is 0.81, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.80

The correlation between FEM and EMOP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

FEM vs. EMOP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FEM	EMOP
Technology	29.9%	37.8%
Industrials	19.1%	6.8%
Energy	12.2%	8.1%
Financial Services	7.5%	18.5%
Basic Materials	7.2%	1.6%
Utilities	6.0%	2.8%
Consumer Cyclical	5.4%	8.1%
Communication Services	4.6%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	8.7%
Healthcare	2.7%	3.4%
Real Estate	2.5%	2.7%

Return for Risk

FEM vs. EMOP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FEM

FEM Risk / Return Rank: 61
FEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
FEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
FEM Omega Ratio Rank: 56
FEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
FEM Martin Ratio Rank: 66

EMOP

EMOP Risk / Return Rank: 69
EMOP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
EMOP Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
EMOP Omega Ratio Rank: 68
EMOP Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EMOP Martin Ratio Rank: 70

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FEM vs. EMOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). 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.

	FEM	EMOP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.70	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.90	2.25	-0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.31	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.67	3.02	-0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.27	9.34	-1.07

FEM vs. EMOP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the EMOP Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEM and EMOP, 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

FEM vs. EMOP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEM drawdown since its inception was -46.23%, which is greater than EMOP's maximum drawdown of -13.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEM and EMOP.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEM	EMOP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.23%	-13.05%	-33.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.88%	-13.05%	+2.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.79%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.23%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.17%	-8.89%	+1.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.94%	-2.49%	-12.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	4.22%	-0.71%

Volatility

FEM vs. EMOP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) is 7.85%, while AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP) has a volatility of 9.04%. This indicates that FEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMOP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEM	EMOP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.85%	9.04%	-1.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.34%	20.96%	-3.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.22%	23.30%	-3.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.86%	22.35%	-3.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.01%	22.35%	-1.34%

FEM vs. EMOP - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEM has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than EMOP's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEM vs. EMOP - Dividend Comparison

FEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.30%, more than EMOP's 1.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	1.22%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FEM First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund	2.30%	3.13%	3.66%	4.96%	6.15%	4.15%	2.68%	3.31%	3.52%	2.45%	2.25%	3.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEM and EMOP in my portfolio?

FEM and EMOP have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEM or EMOP?

EMOP has higher volatility (9.04%) compared to FEM (7.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEM dropped -46.23% vs EMOP's -13.05%.

Which ETF is better, FEM or EMOP?

On 1-year performance, EMOP leads with 39.27% vs 28.96% for FEM. On fees, EMOP is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, FEM has been the lower-risk option at 7.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEM or EMOP?

Over the 1-year period, EMOP has performed better with a 39.27% return vs 28.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEM or EMOP?

EMOP is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FEM or EMOP?

FEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.30%, compared with 1.22% for EMOP.

What is the main difference between FEM and EMOP?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FEM and 0.70% for EMOP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMOP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.44), 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.