FFEM vs. BBEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FFEM (Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF) and BBEM (JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past year, FFEM returned 68.49% vs 53.50% for BBEM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FFEM charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for BBEM.

Performance

FFEM vs. BBEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF (FFEM) and JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFEM achieves a 33.06% return, which is significantly higher than BBEM's 27.02% return.

FFEM

• 1D: -1.56%
• 1M: 9.73%
• YTD: 33.06%
• 6M: 36.71%
• 1Y: 68.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BBEM

• 1D: -1.31%
• 1M: 9.46%
• YTD: 27.02%
• 6M: 29.37%
• 1Y: 53.50%
• 3Y*: 23.00%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FFEM vs. BBEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FFEM Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF	33.06%	40.03%	-2.27%
BBEM JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF	27.02%	32.43%	-2.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FFEM and BBEM is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2024	0.96

The correlation between FFEM and BBEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FFEM vs. BBEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFEM

FFEM Risk / Return Rank: 89
FFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 89
FFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

BBEM

BBEM Risk / Return Rank: 82
BBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
BBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
BBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

FFEM vs. BBEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF (FFEM) and JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM). 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.

	FFEM	BBEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	2.76	+0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.00	3.64	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.51	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.07	4.10	+0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.18	16.16	+4.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFEM vs. BBEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFEM Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is comparable to the BBEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFEM and BBEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FFEM	BBEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.19	2.76	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.21	1.32	+0.89

Drawdowns

FFEM vs. BBEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFEM drawdown since its inception was -16.29%, smaller than the maximum BBEM drawdown of -17.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFEM and BBEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFEM	BBEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.29%	-17.42%	+1.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.57%	-13.12%	-0.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.42%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.56%	-1.31%	-0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.41%	-3.70%	+1.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.41%	3.32%	+0.09%

Volatility

FFEM vs. BBEM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF (FFEM) has a higher volatility of 9.03% compared to JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM) at 8.59%. This indicates that FFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BBEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFEM	BBEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.03%	8.59%	+0.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.77%	17.20%	+1.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.56%	19.49%	+2.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.02%	17.50%	+4.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.02%	17.50%	+4.52%

FFEM vs. BBEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFEM has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than BBEM's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFEM vs. BBEM - Dividend Comparison

FFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, less than BBEM's 4.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BBEM JPMorgan Betabuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF	4.59%	5.86%	2.73%	1.94%
FFEM Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF	1.22%	1.59%	0.16%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFEM and BBEM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, FFEM and BBEM 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.

Which is riskier, FFEM or BBEM?

FFEM has higher volatility (9.03%) compared to BBEM (8.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFEM dropped -16.29% vs BBEM's -17.42%.

Which ETF is better, FFEM or BBEM?

On 1-year performance, FFEM leads with 68.49% vs 53.50% for BBEM. On fees, BBEM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BBEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFEM or BBEM?

Over the 1-year period, FFEM has performed better with a 68.49% return vs 53.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFEM or BBEM?

BBEM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FFEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FFEM or BBEM?

BBEM has the higher dividend yield at 4.59%, compared with 1.22% for FFEM.

What is the main difference between FFEM and BBEM?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FFEM and 0.15% for BBEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.76), 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.