FEMR vs. IEMG
FEMR (Fidelity Enhanced Emerging Markets ETF) and IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. FEMR is actively managed, while IEMG is passively managed. Over the past year, FEMR returned 65.47% vs 54.92% for IEMG. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FEMR charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for IEMG.
Performance
FEMR vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FEMR achieves a 35.27% return, which is significantly higher than IEMG's 27.92% return.
FEMR
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 12.50%
- YTD
- 35.27%
- 6M
- 39.81%
- 1Y
- 65.47%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IEMG
- 1D
- 0.95%
- 1M
- 9.33%
- YTD
- 27.92%
- 6M
- 30.49%
- 1Y
- 54.92%
- 3Y*
- 24.10%
- 5Y*
- 8.08%
- 10Y*
- 10.56%
FEMR vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FEMR Fidelity Enhanced Emerging Markets ETF | 35.27% | 35.27% | -1.49% |
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 27.92% | 32.56% | -1.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between FEMR and IEMG is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2024 | 0.95 |
The correlation between FEMR and IEMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
FEMR vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank
FEMR
IEMG
FEMR vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Emerging Markets ETF (FEMR) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). 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.
| FEMR | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.11 | 2.85 | +0.26 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.91 | 3.67 | +0.24 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 1.52 | +0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.61 | 4.25 | +0.36 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.50 | 16.40 | +2.10 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FEMR | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.11 | 2.85 | +0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.44 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.53 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.25 | 0.36 | +1.89 |
Drawdowns
FEMR vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FEMR drawdown since its inception was -15.58%, smaller than the maximum IEMG drawdown of -38.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMR and IEMG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FEMR | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.58% | -38.71% | +23.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.47% | -13.21% | -1.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -17.21% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -35.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -38.71% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.32% | -12.98% | +10.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.61% | 3.43% | +0.18% |
Volatility
FEMR vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Enhanced Emerging Markets ETF (FEMR) has a higher volatility of 8.58% compared to iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) at 8.13%. This indicates that FEMR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IEMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FEMR | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.58% | 8.13% | +0.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.51% | 16.86% | +1.65% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.16% | 19.39% | +1.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.30% | 18.38% | +2.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.30% | 20.03% | +1.27% |
FEMR vs. IEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FEMR has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than IEMG's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
FEMR vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison
FEMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, less than IEMG's 2.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FEMR Fidelity Enhanced Emerging Markets ETF | 1.39% | 1.92% | 0.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 2.15% | 2.75% | 3.20% | 2.89% | 2.71% | 3.06% | 1.87% | 3.15% | 2.76% | 2.35% | 2.28% | 2.53% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, FEMR and IEMG 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.
FEMR has higher volatility (8.58%) compared to IEMG (8.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEMR dropped -15.58% vs IEMG's -38.71%.
On 1-year performance, FEMR leads with 65.47% vs 54.92% for IEMG. On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, IEMG has been the lower-risk option at 8.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FEMR has performed better with a 65.47% return vs 54.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FEMR.
IEMG has the higher dividend yield at 2.15%, compared with 1.39% for FEMR.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FEMR and 0.09% for IEMG.
FEMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.11 vs 2.85), 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.
Find the right allocation for FEMR and IEMG
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