PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FEMS vs. EDIV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FEMS vs. EDIV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FEMS (First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund) and EDIV (SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - FEMS tracks the NASDAQ AlphaDEX EM Small Cap Index while EDIV tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Dividend Opportunities Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FEMS returned 9.45%/yr vs 9.21%/yr for EDIV. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FEMS charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EDIV.

Performance

FEMS vs. EDIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund (FEMS) and SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEMS achieves a 9.90% return, which is significantly higher than EDIV's 5.93% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FEMS having a 9.45% annualized return and EDIV not far behind at 9.21%.

FEMS

1D
-2.68%
1M
-1.77%
YTD
9.90%
6M
9.40%
1Y
22.39%
3Y*
12.98%
5Y*
4.26%
10Y*
9.45%

EDIV

1D
-1.48%
1M
0.10%
YTD
5.93%
6M
5.72%
1Y
14.10%
3Y*
17.91%
5Y*
10.98%
10Y*
9.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMS vs. EDIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FEMS
First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund		9.90%16.48%1.88%3.55%1.85%3.76%7.85%28.88%-22.63%49.02%
EDIV
SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF		5.93%16.45%12.75%41.91%-15.31%11.21%-9.95%11.80%-6.16%28.20%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMS and EDIV is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.75

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

0.68

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

0.70

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2012

0.72

The correlation between FEMS and EDIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

FEMS vs. EDIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FEMS
EDIV

Technology

16.4%
6.8%

Industrials

16.2%
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

14.9%
7.6%

Basic Materials

11.7%
0.9%

Real Estate

7.6%
1.8%

Energy

7.4%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
9.3%

Utilities

6.3%
1.6%

Financial Services

5.3%
16.0%

Communication Services

4.4%
5.2%

Healthcare

3.0%
0.6%

Technology

FEMS
16.4%
EDIV
6.8%

Industrials

FEMS
16.2%
EDIV
6.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FEMS
14.9%
EDIV
7.6%

Basic Materials

FEMS
11.7%
EDIV
0.9%

Real Estate

FEMS
7.6%
EDIV
1.8%

Energy

FEMS
7.4%
EDIV
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

FEMS
6.8%
EDIV
9.3%

Utilities

FEMS
6.3%
EDIV
1.6%

Financial Services

FEMS
5.3%
EDIV
16.0%

Communication Services

FEMS
4.4%
EDIV
5.2%

Healthcare

FEMS
3.0%
EDIV
0.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund

SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF

Often compared with FEMS:
FEMS vs. EYLDFEMS vs. EWXFEMS vs. AVEEFEMS vs. FNDFFEMS vs. EEMSFEMS vs. SSOFEMS vs. VOO
Often compared with EDIV:
EDIV vs. VWOEDIV vs. EEMSEDIV vs. EEMEDIV vs. EYLDEDIV vs. VOOEDIV vs. XCEMEDIV vs. SCHD

Return for Risk

FEMS vs. EDIV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FEMS
FEMS Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
FEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
FEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank
EDIV
EDIV Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
EDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
EDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
EDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
EDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
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.

FEMS vs. EDIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund (FEMS) and SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV). 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.

FEMSEDIVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.34
1.12

+0.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.86
1.64

+0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.21

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.50

1.37

+1.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.29

4.08

+2.21

FEMS vs. EDIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is comparable to the EDIV Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEMS and EDIV, 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

FEMS vs. EDIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMS drawdown since its inception was -47.85%, smaller than the maximum EDIV drawdown of -53.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMS and EDIV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FEMSEDIVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.85%

-53.36%

+5.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.98%

-10.36%

+1.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.09%

-13.84%

-7.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.43%

-28.32%

+1.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.85%

-40.76%

-7.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.79%

-4.51%

-2.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.36%

-19.31%

+1.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.57%

3.46%

+0.11%

Volatility

FEMS vs. EDIV - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund (FEMS) has a higher volatility of 7.50% compared to SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV) at 4.81%. This indicates that FEMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EDIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FEMSEDIVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.50%

4.81%

+2.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.39%

10.71%

+3.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.75%

12.67%

+4.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.87%

13.91%

+3.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.99%

17.38%

+2.61%

FEMS vs. EDIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEMS has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than EDIV's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEMS vs. EDIV - Dividend Comparison

FEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.37%, more than EDIV's 4.28% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EDIV
SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF		4.28%4.69%3.94%4.26%4.94%3.84%3.52%3.83%3.41%2.99%4.94%5.33%
FEMS
First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund		4.37%4.27%3.97%4.65%4.55%6.25%2.90%4.37%4.68%3.39%2.42%3.28%

Frequently Asked Questions

FEMS and EDIV have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FEMS has higher volatility (7.50%) compared to EDIV (4.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEMS dropped -47.85% vs EDIV's -53.36%.

On 10-year performance, FEMS leads with 9.45% vs 9.21% for EDIV. On fees, EDIV is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, EDIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FEMS has performed better with a 9.45% return vs 9.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EDIV is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FEMS.

FEMS has the higher dividend yield at 4.37%, compared with 4.28% for EDIV.

FEMS tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX EM Small Cap Index, while EDIV tracks S&P Emerging Markets Dividend Opportunities Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FEMS and 0.49% for EDIV.

FEMS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs 1.12), 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 FEMS and EDIV

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